1 . Challenge and selection : Describe your challenge , including all relevant 

 information . 

 I work for a municipality in the Netherlands . Like many cities in the world , the   municipality is trying to develop to a smart city ( we prefer to call it smart   society because it is all about the people and businesses and not about   techniques ) ) . A few years ago , I was working on a project called “ smart   lighting ” . Basically , this project was about upgrading our public lighting system   to a smart and interconnected lighting grid which serves as a carrier for   innovative services . At a certain stage of the project we came across questions   on ownership of data processed by the sensors of the public smart light grid .   Should we treat it as open data that belongs to the public or as proprietary data   that only belongs to the private company ? The private company we talked with   experienced a lot of uncertainty when data should be treated as open data . They   thought that this would have a negative impact on their business model , which   was based on selling of data . At some stage of the project we had endless   discussions on legal aspects of ownership of data . This led to a serious deadlock   of the project . We decided to take a step back and look at the vision on open   data and open innovation . We decided to “ re - scope ” ( test ) this vision : which   beliefs did we have to be tested ? Where are our blind spots ? I choose the method   of storytelling for this re - scoping of the project . 

 2 . Application : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge 

 ( e.g. , what you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 We decided not only to involve people who were directly involved in the   project . We also invited outsiders . The audience I had to speak to was very   broad : there were business developers , light architects , lawyers , policymakers   and financial experts . I decided that if I wanted to create an impact I should   present a real - life case which really impressed me . I started by putting the next   question to the table “ Who owns the data ? ” Then I presented some hard facts   on the growth of data . I asked the audience , how many times you should fold a   piece of paper with a thickness of 2 cm ’s to bridge the distance to the moon ? I   did this to express that tremendous growth of data with figures you ca n’t   imagine . There is an abundance of data and it is ubiquitous like air ( and nobody   asks the question : “ who owns the air ? ” ) . Then I presented this real - life story . It   is about a girl who , at the age of 17 , was confronted with breast cancer in her   family . The diagnosis of breast cancer can be very painful and sometimes even   inaccurate . This 17 - year - old girl just finished classes on coding ( writing   computer algorithms ) . She decided to write an algorithm that could detect   breast cancer . She used data on cellular characteristics from the internet and   research institutions ( open data ) . She managed to write a prototype that was   really powerful and promising . It turned out that her algorithm was pretty 

 accurate when it came to predicting breast cancer . She now studies at a   university where she is perfecting this algorithm . I then asked the audience   what they think would have happened if the data feeding her algorithm was   monopolized by a few research institutions or companies . And I asked the   audience the question on what level the real value was added : at the level of   data or at the level of the intellectual capital of this 17 - years old girl ? I then I   answered the question on ownership of data : this question is not relevant : the   value of data is in the flow not in the source ! ” 

 3 . Insight : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to 

 your challenge ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge   and about design thinking more broadly ) . 

 The most important insight was that storytelling led to a meaningful discussion   on possible business cases on open data . We decided not to ask the “ boring ”   legal question on ownership of data anymore . Another insight I got is that , like   Einstein said , a problem ca n’t be solved in the context in which it arose . We   therefore took the problem out of its context and asked outsiders to help us   unlocking the deadlock , by re - scoping ( testing ) our vision on data ( using the   story ) . 

 4 . Approach : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the 

 same tool you selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why . 

 The first thing I would do different is obvious : focus on aligning mutual   interests . Telling a meaningful story can be helpful by defining problem field   ( extensive legal discussions on ownership of data ) and solution field ( finding   new business cases ) . In our case we came in the end to the conclusion that   problem and solution were actually interconnected . We could have saved   ourselves time if we recognized this at an earlier stage of the project . 

 Franz Richter , January 21 , 2018 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: Franz Richter
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: 1 . Challenge and selection : Describe your challenge , including all relevant 

 information . 

 I work for a municipality in the Netherlands . Like many cities in the world , the   municipality is trying to develop to a smart city ( we prefer to call it smart   society because it is all about the people and businesses and not about   techniques ) ) . A few years ago , I was working on a project called “ smart   lighting ” . Basically , this project was about upgrading our public lighting system   to a smart and interconnected lighting grid which serves as a carrier for   innovative services . At a certain stage of the project we came across questions   on ownership of data processed by the sensors of the public smart light grid .   Should we treat it as open data that belongs to the public or as proprietary data   that only belongs to the private company ? The private company we talked with   experienced a lot of uncertainty when data should be treated as open data . They   thought that this would have a negative impact on their business model , which   was based on selling of data . At some stage of the project we had endless   discussions on legal aspects of ownership of data . This led to a serious deadlock   of the project . We decided to take a step back and look at the vision on open   data and open innovation . We decided to “ re - scope ” ( test ) this vision : which   beliefs did we have to be tested ? Where are our blind spots ? I choose the method   of storytelling for this re - scoping of the project . 

 2 . Application : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge 

 ( e.g. , what you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 We decided not only to involve people who were directly involved in the   project . We also invited outsiders . The audience I had to speak to was very   broad : there were business developers , light architects , lawyers , policymakers   and financial experts . I decided that if I wanted to create an impact I should   present a real - life case which really impressed me . I started by putting the next   question to the table “ Who owns the data ? ” Then I presented some hard facts   on the growth of data . I asked the audience , how many times you should fold a   piece of paper with a thickness of 2 cm ’s to bridge the distance to the moon ? I   did this to express that tremendous growth of data with figures you ca n’t   imagine . There is an abundance of data and it is ubiquitous like air ( and nobody   asks the question : “ who owns the air ? ” ) . Then I presented this real - life story . It   is about a girl who , at the age of 17 , was confronted with breast cancer in her   family . The diagnosis of breast cancer can be very painful and sometimes even   inaccurate . This 17 - year - old girl just finished classes on coding ( writing   computer algorithms ) . She decided to write an algorithm that could detect   breast cancer . She used data on cellular characteristics from the internet and   research institutions ( open data ) . She managed to write a prototype that was   really powerful and promising . It turned out that her algorithm was pretty 

 accurate when it came to predicting breast cancer . She now studies at a   university where she is perfecting this algorithm . I then asked the audience   what they think would have happened if the data feeding her algorithm was   monopolized by a few research institutions or companies . And I asked the   audience the question on what level the real value was added : at the level of   data or at the level of the intellectual capital of this 17 - years old girl ? I then I   answered the question on ownership of data : this question is not relevant : the   value of data is in the flow not in the source ! ” 

 3 . Insight : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to 

 your challenge ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge   and about design thinking more broadly ) . 

 The most important insight was that storytelling led to a meaningful discussion   on possible business cases on open data . We decided not to ask the “ boring ”   legal question on ownership of data anymore . Another insight I got is that , like   Einstein said , a problem ca n’t be solved in the context in which it arose . We   therefore took the problem out of its context and asked outsiders to help us   unlocking the deadlock , by re - scoping ( testing ) our vision on data ( using the   story ) . 

 4 . Approach : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the 

 same tool you selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why . 

 The first thing I would do different is obvious : focus on aligning mutual   interests . Telling a meaningful story can be helpful by defining problem field   ( extensive legal discussions on ownership of data ) and solution field ( finding   new business cases ) . In our case we came in the end to the conclusion that   problem and solution were actually interconnected . We could have saved   ourselves time if we recognized this at an earlier stage of the project . 

 Franz Richter , January 21 , 2018
### Output: 