In the Kuusijärvi recreational area’s project, the City of Vantaa has put the open innovation model and other related innovation models to into a practice. In the City’s proposal, the interaction process of the development plan is introduced (City of Vantaa 2016, 26). There are five steps to implement the process: Collecting of the basis data, ideation, scratch, modification of the scratch, approving the plan, implementing the plan. In the basis data collecting, the survey for the involved firms was implemented, interviews by the City of Vantaa conducted and informational meeting held during the summer 2015. In ideation phase two innovation work shops were arranged in the September 2015. The scratch phase includes the introduction of the proposal for the audience which consisted the participated stakeholders. The introduction of the scratch and modification of the proposal were completed in the beginning of the year 2016. The proposal is partly approved and some of the development ideas have been started to implement in the autumn 2016.
Five interviewees mentioned the City of Vantaa’s vitality program when asked about the beginning of the project. The idea of Kuusijärvi being a gate to Sipoonkorpi National Park was born in the management of the City of Vantaa, in city planning department, more specifically. The idea was originally born during the Sipoonkorpi Natural Park’s project in the year 2010. But in the year 2011 Kuusijärvi development plan was written down to the vitality program of the City and a working group was set up.
“The City set up a vitality program a few years ago and the actions were followed by the program. It was written down that Kuusijärvi plans are required and that the place is to be an entering gate to Sipoonkorpi National Park. When the gate is opening in the future to the direction of SIpoonkorpi, Kuusijörvi has enormous role and it has remarkable location. When the project was written down to the vitality program the City of Vantaa started to prepare a working group for the project.”
Interview 8.
While discussing about the vitality program and the beginning of the development plan, the public sector participant were neutral in their expressions during the discussions.
This group was the only which mentioned the program. And when they did I noticed that it could be compared to any other task they have in their working life. They did not have any emotions related to it. The vitality program was a fact they emphasized in the interviews.
All the participators agreed that it is a positive matter that Kuusijärvi area will be developed and that the area has potential. Ten of the eleven interviewees agreed that there are facilities which should be took care and fixed. All participators were glad that they themselves or their company were involved to the development process at least on some level. Common workshops and innovative meetings were considered positive activities as well.
It was noticed that some of the participators were skeptic about increasing the number of visitors in Kuusijärvi. Three interviewees mentioned the limitation of the small lake where the water does not change fast. They were concerned about the eutrophication.
Especially one resident discussed about the lake in passionately. Clearly he has a strong bond to the place. Other participators were only mentioning the resistance of the lake during the discussions. Moreover, two participators felt that the place is mainly for
residents of Vantaa city and the area should not be strained with tourist streams.
However, all participators thought it was good idea to consider Kuusijärvi as a starting point for different activities and as planned, Kuusijärvi would be suitable gate to Sipoonkorpi’s Natural Park. Mainly all entrepreneurs and employees of the City of Vantaa considered bringing international tourists them to Kuusijärvi a good idea.
Table 3. Summary of the beginning of the development process.
Code Frequent themes & words Beginning of the project Vitality Program
Recreational area A place for residents
Gate to Sipoonkorpi’s Natural Park Positive attitude for developing project
During the interviews, all the interviewees were giving general comments about the Kuusijärvi project. It was clearly mentioned by several participants that the area is recreational area where visitors can mostly swim during the summer time and cross-country ski during the winter. The public smoked saunas have settled users’ year around. Besides individual users there is groups visiting in the area. During the interviews, I observed that for some participators the place is very important and they have emotional bond for Kuusijärvi. Between the residents, entrepreneurs and the public sector I noticed that the residents were most emotional during discussion.
Entrepreneurs have bond to the area but it is not that strong emotionally than residences have. The employees in the public sector were not very emotional while discussing Kuusijärvi. As an example, one participator, who is a resident was a regular visitor of the smoked sauna and ice swimming. He mentioned that the main purpose of the place is to remain the place for the residents for own city and the city should not market the place as the new destination. The tone of the voice was passionate while
discussing about the topic. Similarly, all interviewed residents had similar tone in their voices during the conversations. At times their voices got eager while discussing about new innovations and ideas which could be developed to the area. Moreover, this group used more aggressive sound in their voice. For example, during the conversation about responsibilities and communication they were showing their disappointment in their voice and body language more easily than other participators. The participated entrepreneurs did not show very emotional while discussions. However, during their talking they were disclosing their opinions through body language and voice. For example, even they had not emotional tone they clearly showed whether they have positive, negative or skeptic attitude against the project. While interviewing, I noticed that some of the entrepreneurs would have liked say more words while talking but they didn’t. They were reserved and tried to control themselves and keep the conversation as appropriate as possible. It seemed that they were frustrated to discuss about the development plans which were not begun to conduct. Perhaps they consider Kuusijärvi very important to them not only via working place but also for themselves. On the other hand, two entrepreneurs were showing their disregard about the project in their expressions. During the conversations, they were showing in their voice that they are not very interested in the City of Vantaa’s development plans even they had involved to the project. Because these two entrepreneurs were operating mostly in Sipoo’s Natural Park they did not consider the Kuusijärvi’s plans that important for them.
The participants from the public sector were the most neutral from their expressions during the interviews. With some interviewees, I sensed tense in their voice.
Additionally, their body language expressed that they were nervous about something.
Perhaps they were insecure about the research questions I stated to them. I noticed that a few participators were very honest about the negative effects of the project such as lack of resources and scattered responsibility. On the other hand, this group has the most positive attitude against development plans and the whole project.