Witness experience in the Finnish courts
Jyrhämä, Tero (2023)
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2023061223651
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2023061223651
Tiivistelmä
How witnesses experience the court process has been studied little in Finland. The purpose of this thesis is to provide new knowledge about witness experience for the benefit of the National Courts Administration, a governmental agency responsible for the functioning and improvement of the court system in Finland. The new knowledge can be used when making policy decisions concerning witnesses’ role and responsibilities.
More specifically, this thesis provides answers to questions: 1) how witnesses experience the court process, and 2) what are the factors that affect that experience? Based on the findings on these two questions, a development work was undertaken with the goal of 3) improving the witness experience, whilst at the same time a) improving the overall court process (maximum objective), or at least b) refrain from making it worse (minimum objective).
The thesis explores and employs theoretical frameworks developed both within the public and private service management research. The key theoretical (and practical) concepts such as obligation encounter, public value, public value scorecard, service-dominant logic and public service-dominant logic are explored and, ultimately, brought together. This results in a coherent theoretical framework that is then applied for the practical data collection and development work.
Data collection employed qualitative research methods. Desk research and background interviews of court personnel were utilised in the development of the interview guide for witnesses. The main data collection method was the in-depth interviews of witnesses. The interview data was also enriched with observation data.
The development work resulted in a solution, a Frequently Asked Questions about Testifying -brochure and website. Prototypes for the brochure and website were developed. The brochure and website were then tested via a survey directed to witnesses.
The main findings of this study are that the witnesses take giving evidence seriously, but often experience anxiety/stress due to, and during the process. The witnesses often felt that they were treated in a professional yet friendly way, although this seemed to surprise many, the expectation being a more formal process and treatment. There is a lot of uncertainty with regard to their role, responsibilities and what is expected of them. Testifying can also be a positive life experience. The main wishes were identified to be: clear and good quality information, and professional yet friendly treatment.
The FAQ-approach devised to tackle the said issues was regarded as very useful by the witnesses. Also, the witnesses reported positive changes in their perceptions about testifying and the judiciary in general. After having received the FAQ-information, the witnesses reported being more motivated, trusting the judiciary more, feeling less anxious/stressed and being more confident of their ability to do well when giving evidence.
These positive findings show that service design work can be useful in improving not only the direct customer experience, but enhancing the perceptions and improving the legitimacy of public services in general.
Keywords: witness experience, legal design, public service, public value, court, judiciary
More specifically, this thesis provides answers to questions: 1) how witnesses experience the court process, and 2) what are the factors that affect that experience? Based on the findings on these two questions, a development work was undertaken with the goal of 3) improving the witness experience, whilst at the same time a) improving the overall court process (maximum objective), or at least b) refrain from making it worse (minimum objective).
The thesis explores and employs theoretical frameworks developed both within the public and private service management research. The key theoretical (and practical) concepts such as obligation encounter, public value, public value scorecard, service-dominant logic and public service-dominant logic are explored and, ultimately, brought together. This results in a coherent theoretical framework that is then applied for the practical data collection and development work.
Data collection employed qualitative research methods. Desk research and background interviews of court personnel were utilised in the development of the interview guide for witnesses. The main data collection method was the in-depth interviews of witnesses. The interview data was also enriched with observation data.
The development work resulted in a solution, a Frequently Asked Questions about Testifying -brochure and website. Prototypes for the brochure and website were developed. The brochure and website were then tested via a survey directed to witnesses.
The main findings of this study are that the witnesses take giving evidence seriously, but often experience anxiety/stress due to, and during the process. The witnesses often felt that they were treated in a professional yet friendly way, although this seemed to surprise many, the expectation being a more formal process and treatment. There is a lot of uncertainty with regard to their role, responsibilities and what is expected of them. Testifying can also be a positive life experience. The main wishes were identified to be: clear and good quality information, and professional yet friendly treatment.
The FAQ-approach devised to tackle the said issues was regarded as very useful by the witnesses. Also, the witnesses reported positive changes in their perceptions about testifying and the judiciary in general. After having received the FAQ-information, the witnesses reported being more motivated, trusting the judiciary more, feeling less anxious/stressed and being more confident of their ability to do well when giving evidence.
These positive findings show that service design work can be useful in improving not only the direct customer experience, but enhancing the perceptions and improving the legitimacy of public services in general.
Keywords: witness experience, legal design, public service, public value, court, judiciary