Manifesto for Pro-Human Digitalization

I am not a theorist of digitalization in the public sector.

I was a mayor.
I know public administration from the inside — its rhythm, its barriers, its language.

Even then, I believed technology could help. I created digital tools for citizens, redesigned procedures, and built modern websites.

And everything seemed fine — until one day I asked an employee to find something on our new municipal website.

After a long pause, I heard:

“The site looks nice… but you can’t find anything on it.”

I thought: “Well, maybe not everyone keeps up.”

But a few weeks later, I heard the same thing — from my own wife.

And once again, I dismissed it, telling myself “I know better.”

My term ended — I founded an IT company.
I started building voting systems for councils, consultation platforms, municipal portals. I developed strategies, presentations, implementations.

From the outside, it looked modern, dynamic, on trend.

But inside — something started to weigh on me.

Not immediately. At first, everything worked: clients were happy, tools looked “professional,” and I was convinced I was “doing good things.”

Only later did I realize I had spent years focused more on systems — not people.

I thought about clicks, not experiences.
About code, not dignity.
About what looked good in a presentation — not what the person on the other side of the screen actually felt.

And finally, I understood:

Digitalization cannot be an end in itself.
It cannot be a race to implement the most systems.
It must serve. It must help. It must be worthy of trust.

I’m not calling for regression or abandoning progress.
Digitalization means moving forward — and movement is necessary if we want to grow as a society.

Technology is a powerful tool. But like any tool — it needs purpose and responsibility.

That’s why I call for digitalization that truly serves.

That does not exclude.
That helps everyone.
Every person — regardless of age, skill, or place of residence.

This is what Pro-Human Digitalization means to me.

And this is why I offer this text as an invitation —
to dialogue, to cooperation, to change.

Why this matters

Public service digitalization is no longer the future — it is the present.

Most civic tasks today happen through a screen: benefit applications, doctor appointments, school info, taxes, even garbage collection.

But technology, once meant to connect us, too often divides us.

It was meant to make things easier — and often makes them harder.

It’s not that the systems don’t work.
It’s a question of who they work for — and whether they are worthy of the people using them.

In the public sector, there is no competition. Offices don’t have to “attract customers.”
But that does not give them permission to be indifferent.

Lack of choice cannot mean lack of respect.

The Pro-Human Philosophy of Digitalization did not arise from trends — but from real experience.

From conversations with people who got lost in “modern systems.”
From calls with friends who didn’t know where to click to download a certificate.
From stories of how hard it was to fill out a form — not because it was complex, but because no one thought about the person on the other side of the screen.

This is not a campaign. Not an app. Not a trend.

It is a philosophy for acting in a digital world, where:

• Safe means: I can trust it.

• Accessible means: I can reach it.

• Simple means: I understand what to do.

What I’m sharing here is just the beginning.

The indicators, evaluation methods, and participation tools outlined later are not a closed list.
They are starting points — to be improved through practice and dialogue.

The digital world is changing.
So must our approach — to serve real people better.

This is not an alternative to standards like WCAG, GDPR, or SDG.

On the contrary — it complements them with the human perspective.

It brings a human tone to well-crafted rules — through empathy, understanding, and daily care for dignity.

Pro-Human Digitalization calls for treating standards seriously — but also humanely.

That’s why I continue to work on putting this philosophy into action —
and I warmly invite everyone who cares about the person on the other side of the screen to join.

Who is this for?

Pro-Human Digitalization is not just for IT professionals.

It’s not a UX trend or a startup framework.

It’s an invitation for everyone shaping public services in digital environments:

• A clerk approving a form structure

• A school director posting a schedule

• A developer coding the system

• A designer setting contrasts and font sizes

• A support agent answering confused callers

All of them impact the digital experience of real people.

It is also for those who:

• Don’t know where to start — but want to do better

• Feel that “what we have now” is not enough

• Seek respectful language and tools

• Refuse to accept cold, indifferent technology

You don’t have to know how to code.
You just have to ask:

“Will the person using this feel treated with dignity?” 

Safe

The word "safety" in public digitalization usually appears in legal contexts: GDPR, certificates, logs, encryption.

But real safety does not begin in a system.
It begins in a relationship — between the one who creates a digital service and the one who is asked to trust it.

Safe doesn’t mean having five layers of protection.
It means understanding what we protect — and why it matters.

For a system, data is just a “record.”
For a person, it may be a piece of life, health, family, work — sometimes, even crisis.

That’s why safety is not just a duty. It’s a commitment.

Safe means:

• Before collecting data, ask: is it truly necessary?

• If in doubt — ask again.

• Treat data not as technical material, but as something entrusted to you in hope, not to be betrayed.

In digital public services, the goal is not just to “tick compliance boxes.”
The goal is to understand that often, the user has no choice:

• They can’t change the form.

• They can’t delete the account.

• They have no alternative.

That means their data must be treated with greater respect — not less.

Not every institution needs expensive security systems.
A local culture center doesn’t need military-grade encryption.

But every institution must ask:

• What level of protection fits the type of data we collect?

• What happens if this trust is broken?

In practice:

• Collect only the data you truly need.

• Make sure the team understands that data protection is about dignity — not just compliance.

• When in doubt — stop and review the process.

• Don’t copy others — tailor safeguards to the real sensitivity of the data.

• Clearly state who processes the data, where, and for what reason — not just formally, but for trust.

Safe doesn’t mean “perfect.”
It means: “with care.”

And care is the first and most important step toward digital dignity.

Accessible

They say accessibility means WCAG compliance.
But accessibility starts earlier — with a decision:

“Will the person who needs this actually get here?”

Accessible means: being present. Not just online.
Present for anyone looking for help, information, or contact.

Someone cannot see.
Someone cannot hear.
Someone has mobility limitations.
Someone has cognitive difficulties — or just a hard day.

All these people are part of the community.
So they are also part of the community’s digital reality.

You cannot leave them behind the screen.

This isn’t about every site being 200% compliant with every rule.
It’s about every person feeling invited, not excluded.
About digital presence being a bridge, not a barrier.

Some people need screen readers.
Others — simpler language.
Others still — a clear site structure, or they get lost.

Accessibility is not a luxury.
It’s a condition of participation.

In practice:

• Don’t just copy templates — think about who will use the service.

• Ensure contrast, clarity, and structure. It’s not aesthetics — it’s respect.

• Don’t overcomplicate the language. A government website is not an academic thesis.

• If something is important — don’t hide it below the fold or behind 3 clicks.

• Run a test: can a senior, a blind user, or a child navigate the site?

Accessible means:
We are here for those who have less strength, less skill, less confidence.

And their presence is the true measure of service quality.

Simple

Simple does not mean dumbed down.
It does not mean “quick and dirty,” nor “for dummies.”

Simple means: clear.
So that people don’t have to guess, try, or hope they clicked the right thing.

Simple is a form of care.

Because nothing is more humiliating than feeling stupid while using something that claims to be “easy.”

Public services are part of everyday life — often in moments of stress, pressure, or uncertainty:

• A senior trying to book a doctor’s visit

• A parent looking for vaccine info for their child

• A student needing a certificate

• Someone filing a claim after losing a job

None of them is there to admire the layout.

They just want to know:

What should I do?
Where should I click?
Is this the right place?

Simple means:

• Every element has a reason — not just visual appeal

• Messages say: “We understand you,” not “Error 401”

• Buttons are where you expect them

• It doesn’t take 10 clicks to do something that should take one

In practice:

• Before writing, say the message out loud. If it sounds unnatural — rewrite it.

• Don’t say “two-factor authentication.” Say: “Enter the code you got by SMS.”

• Don’t say “SSL encryption protocol.” Say: “Your connection is secure.”

• Don’t say “access rights management.” Say: “Choose who can view your data.”

• Don’t make people read instructions. Make the page not need any.

• Remove what’s unnecessary. If it doesn’t serve the person — it distracts.

This is not about making it primitive.
It’s about making people feel confident, not stupid.

Simple is not a design style.
It’s an ethical choice.

Measurement, Participation, Vision — How to Do It Better

1. Measuring Trust

• Return rate of users (retention indicator)

• Number of reports about unclear messages

• Availability of human support (phone/chat usage)

• Satisfaction score from feedback like: “Did you feel treated with respect?” (scale 1–5)

2. Measuring Accessibility

• WCAG audit results: number of barriers identified and removed

• Task completion time by a person aged 65+ (e.g., booking a medical visit)

• Availability of alternative channels: form, phone, in-person

• Number and handling of reports from people with disabilities

3. Measuring Simplicity

• Average number of clicks needed to complete a task

• Readability of language (text complexity analysis)

• Rate of users needing help or instructions

4. Gathering Feedback from Diverse Groups

• In-depth interviews with seniors, blind users, and those with cognitive difficulties

• Workshops with users from various backgrounds, including rural areas

• Dry-run prototype testing

• Paper feedback forms in public offices, libraries, schools

• Phone hotlines for reporting issues

5. Actively Involving Citizens

• Online and offline public consultations — clear and simple

• “Empathy tests” — filling forms together in different roles

• Digital suggestion boxes for ideas and issues

• Participatory budgeting for digital projects

• Permanent user councils as advisory bodies

6. Keeping It Human and Up-to-Date

• Annual technical and UX reviews of services

• Monitoring of emerging technologies (AI, chatbots, biometrics) for usability

• Ensuring human contact is possible in every automated process

• “Change sensors” teams — for early testing and feedback

• Rule: “No change may worsen accessibility” + testing with users aged 65+

This Is Not the End — It’s the Beginning of a Bigger Conversation

What I describe here is not based on ideal conditions.

On the contrary — it was born in response to realities we know well. It doesn’t ignore challenges — it sees them clearly and takes them seriously.

These challenges include:

• Financial – How to fund testing, support, and user involvement?

• Political/strategic – How to convince leaders and implement meaningful change?

• Sectoral – How to adapt this approach to education, healthcare, local government?

• Ethical – How to balance simplicity with security, personalization with privacy, help with freedom?

• Organizational/social – How to provide training, support materials, and real human presence in digital processes?

These are serious challenges.

But that’s exactly why we must name them, study them, and seek solutions together.

Not to find perfect formulas —
but to ensure people aren’t left alone in a world of digital systems.

I know this is only a first step toward something bigger.
It is an invitation to collaborate.
An attempt to articulate values that many feel intuitively but rarely express.

A call to pause — and look at technology from the perspective of dignity, not just code.

I invite you to help develop, test, and refine this concept.
To build real tools, methods, and examples that make digitalization not just possible — but worthy.

I invite you to public dialogue and cooperation — regardless of your role or expertise, because no one knows human needs better than humans themselves.

Together, we can build a digital world that doesn’t dehumanize.
A digitalization that is not ashamed of people.

Sincerely,
Viktor Prytulko