People-centred processes & decision making
Between-the-lines
‘Twitter friendly’ events
I recently attended Bang the Table’s ‘Pop Up’ Adelaide event and gave a presentation on some thoughts of how we might see face-to-face and online civic engagement becoming more integrated in the future.
My presentation highlighted that even if we don’t see our future civic engagement activity attracting a demographic beyond the usual suspects (we all know who they are), we may see numbers naturally increase due to the ‘baby boomers’ reaching the age we most often see at our face-to-face meetings. Of course, I would LOVE to see a broader demographic take an interest in community life and civic responsibility but as a worst case scenario I think we can be optimistic that numbers at our face-to-face events will grow due to this boom of our usual suspect demographic.
Along with this boom in older people, will come a boom of older people who are technologically savvy. No longer will I be faced with a room full of people who look blankly at me when I ask if they’ve checked in on Facebook, or taken note of the event hashtag. No doubt we’ll be on to something else by then anyway.
But amongst all of this, the Adelaide event triggered some online discussion amongst my fellow South Australian engagement practitioners about how even in today’s technologically savvy world, it can still feel awkward for those of us who like to have a conversation online whilst attending face-to-face events to do so without feeling impolite! Word hasn’t quite spread to everyone yet that the people at an event rapidly typing on their tablets or smartphone aren’t being ignorant or impolite. Far from it. Those people ‘on their phones’ are often sharing the insights from the face-to-face event with a broader online community. There is a parallel discussion taking place – often accompanied by dialogue and deliberation that includes people unable to attend (recently named #gatehashing by Max Hardy and quickly adopted by Andrew Coulson) as well as bringing together people at the event who might not be able to connect in person due to seating arrangements, time constraints and so on. It’s awesome!
And on pondering all of this in the Twitter world whilst at the event, the fabulous Valli Morphett asked (on Twitter of course) how we might overcome the barrier of seeming impolite whilst tweeting at events. A discussion ensued that quickly highlighted the potential for holding ‘Twitter friendly’ events. What would would these events involve? Well, some initial thoughts were –
– Clearly displayed signs sharing the #hashtag for the event, along with an explanation of what a hashtag is and why people will be using Twitter
– Large screens showing live tweets for everyone at the event to see
– Having ‘social media etiquette norms’ shared as part of the introduction to the event
– Having table centrepieces with the #hashtag and ‘permission to use phone for tweeting’ sign
– Opportunity to join the conversation for newbies – perhaps real life Tweet buddies to help get you started at the event
– Twitter handles/names incorporated on name badges or attendee lists
As Andrew correctly wrote, he’s sure someone will blog about Twitter friendly events soon. So there, I’ve blogged. But what other things could you do to make an event Twitter friendly?
What does a vegetable patch and good community engagement have in common?
It’s been a great summer so far for getting out in the garden. I love a whiling away a few hours in the garden and clearing my mind. But I recently starting wondering what a healthy thriving vegetable patch might have in common with good community engagement…
A community – if nurtured well – can be very powerful. If nurtured poorly it can be dysfunctional.
I like to think of it in simple terms…
Picture a garden bed. Imagine there are hundreds of different herbs and vegetables all growing together in the same veggie patch. If you nurture them by providing them with nourishing soil, regular composting, decent water and protect them from the elements – what happens?
They will grow healthy and strong and provide you with a useful product that you can create all sorts of different meals from. The best bit? You can keep going back to pick more over and over again.
On the flip side, you can forget to give it the attention it needs to thrive. Sure you might be too busy to properly water the produce regularly, you might scatter the odd bit of fertiliser every now and again when you remember and with some good luck one or two of the veggies might grow a little bit. But once you’ve picked them, that’s it. The patch is empty. There’s no ongoing benefit. The environment simply won’t help generate anything any more.
I have two questions for you
1. If you were a vegetable which patch would you rather be living in?
2. If you want to grow good quality vegetables which patch would you rather be cultivating?
When it comes down to it, human communities and options for engaging with them are no different to veggie gardens.
The thriving veggie patch took a lot more nurturing. It needed plenty of hard work, dedication and attention. But you’re left with a healthy garden that you can pick and choose from as you need to. You know you will get good quality produce over and over again. It saves you hundreds of dollars a year on your grocery bill – and you’re healthier for it! You notice the garden seems to take on a life of its own. Your tomatoes are multiplying at a rapid rate and new shoots are popping up day after day eager to be part of your patch and you haven’t even lifted a finger!
On the other hand, the neglected veggie patch might have provided you with one or two tasty morsels but probably more from sheer luck and determination on the vegetables’ part rather than anything you can take credit for as the gardener.
And what about all the little seeds of promise that you lost along the way? You’ll never know what benefits they could have added to your next meal. Next time you want to grow a veggie patch, you’ll have to start all over from scratch because your soil isn’t healthy – you need to re-do your foundations again.
So let’s apply the vegetable garden philosophy to community engagement.
As a living, breathing community member (a vegetable) I would rather be part of a community (vegetable patch) which is being facilitated by an organisation or representative (the gardener) who is responsive to my needs and genuinely cares about what will help me and my area to thrive – and not just this time around, but also in the future. I want a long-lasting, fruitful and connected relationship with my gardener.
You won’t get the same results from me if you don’t give me the individual attention I deserve. I don’t feel nurtured when I’m asked to fill in a token survey sent to me by someone I’ve never interacted with along my journey. I’m probably not going to attend a stock standard town hall meeting which would be a struggle to get to even if I wanted to because it’s scheduled from 4pm and I don’t finish work until much later.
If this gardener had worked hard on cultivating a relationship with me, then he would know this and would seek my input in a different way – a way that suits me, my needs and my schedule. In turn, I’d be more inclined to help him grow his garden. I would talk to and involve relevant people from my own network. The gardener has nurtured me and I will nurture others on his behalf.
The expert gardener isn’t interested in survey responses. He is interested in quality relationships and connections. He knows that 10 good relationships with key community members will be more valuable to him in the long run than 100 survey responses. Because those 10 influencers will go forth and multiply – much like out-of-control basil.
Think of it as the veggie patch affiliate sales model!
I challenge you to think about your own vegetable patch or the vegetable patch you are cultivating.
Could it be time for some landscaping, pruning and composting?
Think of me as your horticulturalist – I’m here to help you propagate, cultivate and maintain your garden. My gloves, watering can and trowel are at the ready and there is nothing I enjoy more than a garden overhaul!
Community Think Tanks
Hear about Becky Hirst’s role in the development of the 2011 South Australia Strategic Plan, particularly in relation to the Community Think Tanks she facilitated.
Is Social Media based on Community Engagement principles?
A lot of businesses and organisations place social media and community engagement in their Marketing or PR department (or if they are on top of their game they have a specialist social media team or community engagement department) Now if you look at the basic principles of Marketing and PR, you soon realise that the concepts of social media and community engagement are a pain in the ass for both professions.
As Marketers we ultimately want to sell you a product, experience, event etc. As a PR professional we want to manage the message and ensure you hear what you want to hear.
It is hard for us to come round to the fact that people want to start their own conversation, thoughts and views about our product, experience, event, company etc; it’s our role as marketers and PR professionals to control that message. Although ultimately this is great, when we get bad reviews or feedback we can no longer just push them under the carpet.
As a Government or local Council it must be the same experience. Traditionally you were voted in by the people, you have the knowledge, the big picture; therefore you can make decisions without talking to those same people who put you there. The only ‘problem’ is that they now want a say in the day to day decisions.
Now I believe social media is a positive concept for Marketers and PR professionals, it now actually means we have to have a good product, experience, event etc and be transparent in our message, if not then by lunchtime there will be 20,000 ‘likes’ on a page all about how bad your products are, 8,000 negative blog posts, 2,000 I hate you YouTube clips, 16,000 Tweets all informing us of where we went wrong.
Community engagement is a positive concept for Government and local Councils, it allows for an open and transparent process in decision making. If you don’t engage the community, then you will have people tying themselves to trees, picket lines outside your offices, 20,000 likes on a page set up to complain about your new development, 8,000 blogs informing you where you went wrong.
Both social media and community engagement tell us that by engaging with our communities and involving them in the decision/communication process then we can create meaningful relationships and the right outcomes.
When the two come together, they are a very powerful tool.
Written by BHC Associate and guest blogger, Daniel Procter
Will Facebook technology replace sticky dot voting?
I came across this fab video yesterday of Renault at the Amsterdam Motor Show using Facebook to enable ‘real people’ to ‘like’ things on their Facebook profiles in person.
Clever, ey?
I think we’re a long way off implementing this type of ‘card swiping’ at community engagement events but can’t help but dream of the day when community members turn up to a consultation event and are issued with little swipe cards so that they can share their offline experience (and opinions) with their online friends. The potential is huge and I hope to give this a go sometime before my retirement! (That gives us approximately 33 years)
Is ‘Upload Fatigue’ the new Consultation Fatigue?
We’re in a really exciting era of citizen engagement. Whether we call it citizen engagement, public participation or community engagement, it’s a hot topic and the concept of involving people in decision making and problem solving is becoming greatly accepted as good practice.
And not only is the concept becoming greatly accepted, the range of tools we have at our finger tips is astounding. Not only do we have expert facilitators who provide creative and engaging tools and techniques that are a far cry from traditional public meetings (that are famously known for conjuring up all kinds of angry and emotional confrontations) but we have a wealth of online tools at our fingertips which reach a much broader audience than the typical meeting attendees of yesteryear.
Some might say that the era of ‘bad’ consultation is behind us.
Or is it?
We’ve just started to move forward following an era of, dare I say it, tokenistic consultation activity where decisions had quite possibly already been made and the process was conducted to purely to tick a box. In my opinion, years of bad consultation activity has lead to a demise of trust and interest on the part of the general public in relation to genuine Government decision making. The public have become fed up of either constantly providing ideas and input, only to discover the final decision doesn’t reflect the feedback provided by the public; or being asked again and again the same thing – of course giving the response ‘we keep telling you what we want, just do it!’. This frustration is often referred to in our sector as ‘consultation fatigue’.
So great, we’re moving in to an era where we’re starting to see more and more creative tools and techniques are being used to ‘engage’ with the community. Brilliant. It’s a joy to see organisations embrace the idea of public participation.
However, I must admit I’m really worried. The shiny, shimmery tools that are at our fingertips in the 21st century are all singing and all dancing in the ‘we really want you to have your say’ department, but often lack both depth of engagement and methodology in the ‘your say will genuinely influence the final decision’ department.
I’ve seen a flurry of Government websites and pages recently asking people to ‘tell us your ideas’, ‘upload a photo of something you’d like to change’, or ‘put a pin in our virtual map’. All shiny and shimmery on the outside, but when you delve in to the methodology behind it, it often reveals the actual say the public has over the decision is very limited, yet they’ve been given permission to write a wish list about anything they desire!
This runs a huge risk of public disempowerment, frustration and, drum roll please… consultation fatigue.
So what’s my conclusion?
Let’s keep things shiny and shimmery. They look good and they work incredibly well in attracting people to participate.
But let’s add some sound public participation methodology to our online engagement activity, just as we would for any good face-to-face activity. This might include –
– When there’s a decision to be made, or problem to be solved, let’s ensure we are clear about what is negotiable and what isn’t negotiable. Make sure the public input isn’t ‘pie in the sky’ thinking that is irrelevant to the decision.
– Let’s treat participants with respect, providing them with a safe space in which to participate. This might include considering options for anonymity and/or moderation.
– Let’s consider the depth of engagement and how we can best utilize public knowledge and input. Brainstorming ideas is all well and good, but sometimes a conversation can open up a wealth of potential and provides the community with a space in which to participate in dialogue and deliberation which can provide a richer input in to decision making.
– If we don’t start implementing some methodology behind our online citizen engagement, we’re simply continuing the era of ‘bad’ consultation but behind the disguise of shiny, shimmery tools.
You have been warned!
Is ‘Upload Fatigue’ the new Consultation Fatigue was originally written by Becky Hirst in her role as Managing Director, TableTalk Engagement
Don’t be afraid… I dare you to start the conversation
I had the pleasure of independently facilitating a challenging event with a challenging topic on Saturday. The topic was nuclear energy so as you can imagine I was braced to put my facilitation, moderation and mediation skills to the test.
Interestingly, the Council who hosted the event (The Corporation of the Town of Walkerville) had decided to invite four scientific professionals to speak on the topic – all putting forward their arguments as to why they are in favour of nuclear energy.
As you can imagine, this decision caused outrage particularly given the Council had also chosen to promote the event using a cartoon image of a couple questioning whether they should have a nuclear reactor in the backyard. The flyer itself attracted media attention and the RSVPs were flowing in, so we were expecting a big crowd. We were also aware that protesters would be present – something which I completely understood, given the pro-nuclear slant the afternoon was taking.
One of the first questions I ask my clients when I undertake a piece of work for them is ‘what is the decision to be made?’ but in this instance there was no decision. The decision as to whether Australia should have nuclear power was way way out of these decision-makers hands. This was simply a case of the Mayor having heard an interesting public lecture on the topic and wanting to bring the conversation to Walkerville. There was no intention for a nuclear reactor in Walkerville – it was just a conversation about a topic that is of interest (or dis-interest!) to our population. I did question why they had chosen to hear only the pro-argument as in most instances you would hear from both those in favour and those against and I must confess I was a little apprehensive as to how it was going to pan out.
I’m pleased to report that the afternoon was a success. I have no interest in whether peoples opinions changed as a result of it because being completely independent that wasn’t my mission – so this isn’t my measure of success. My mission was to guide the speakers, the Council and the audience through the discussion and this happened in a calm, considered and incredibly civilised manner. As at the majority of events I facilitate on controversial topics, I was expecting questions from the audience to be more like long statements of opinions but no – we had short succinct and very well composed questions. The panel members respondent with the same tone. It was a conversation… a real conversation!
I don’t know whether the success of the event was because we planned for worst case scenarios; because we laid down some fairly hefty structure and guidelines for the running of the session; or even because the idea of hearing just one side of the argument meant there wasn’t the back and forth debate like watching a game of tennis.
My biggest learning from the event was in relation to the courage shown by the Mayor of Walkerville to host a public conversation on a controversial topic. She took a great deal of personal flack for her decision but went ahead nevertheless. From the feedback received she is of course considering hosting an event looking specifically at the ‘anti-nuclear’ argument.
My wish for the future is that more Government organisations and departments don’t shy away from the difficult conversations but instead take them on (with thorough and sound planning of course). I also hope more start to use scenario based questioning as Walkerville did. The mundane questions we see again and again in public engagement activity (What’s your vision for the future? How can we better serve you?) can only be described as weak and pathetic when you compare them to ‘What about a nuclear reactor in your backyard?’.
Yes, this particular event was fictional as far as Walkerville’s decision-making goes but imagine the lively discussion and debate that would occur if instead we looked the REAL issues in the eye and ran at them with great gusto! If Walkerville can pack out a town hall with a diverse crowd on a Saturday afternoon on a long weekend, then perhaps we’ve got something to learn from them.
For those interested in the nuclear debate, and hearing about the event from one of the speakers perspectives, visit Decarbonise SA.
Time-lapsed Open Space
I facilitated the South Australia IAP2 event yesterday which looked at the future of online community engagement. I used Open Space Technology as the method of facilitation and it was great fun. The technique seemed to be well received by most. Only one participant wanted a more traditional approach of ‘listening’ to an expert present and used the ‘Law of Two Feet’ to leave the event! We live and learn!
This video is a time-lapse of the event, with an image captured every 45 seconds. Enjoy!
Who wants to chat?
It’s no secret that I’m currently juggling the highs and lows of being a new Mum with my continued interest and passion for delivery of sound community engagement. I feel incredibly lucky to be able to spend precious time with my daughter balanced with running my business.
Since she arrived in my life 5-months ago, the one thing I have had by my side day and night has been my iPhone! A compact little gadget (even the iPad started gathering dust for a while) loaded with sanity-saving devices – both baby and Becky related. My trusty iPhone has provided me with instant ‘sounds of the womb’ in the depth of the night; lyrics to lullabies at the touch of a button; monitoring and recording growth, feeds, sleep times and even nappy changes.
But for my non-goo-goo-gaa-gaa stuff, the trusty iPhone has provided me with social connectivity as it always did. I’ve been able to keep up to date with the rest of the world through my usual social media favourites and I can’t highlight enough how sanity-saving this has been.
So where is this babble going? Well to set the scene, on Wednesday evening I was walking around my house with baby in her stroller sleeping and dinner on the hob. I had a few moments to myself so thought I’d check out my Twitter feed (as you do) using my iPhone. I quickly noticed an invitation to participate in a conversation with senior health professionals and Ministers about local health services as part of an initiative called ‘HealthChat’.
“Brilliant!” I thought! I’d been meaning for a while to provide some feedback on how great I had found the public health system when having my baby back in December and this seemed like the perfect opportunity. I suddenly had access to the highest level – and this is where I wanted to send my praise! So I tweeted straight to the Minister of Health & Aging and it felt great to know he was ready to listen. I was on a roll… I sent a couple more bits of praise whilst I was at it!
I waited a few minutes anticipating the next part of the ‘chat’. As a facilitator myself I was preempting what they were going to ask me. I thought to myself that they’d probably delve further. I’d mentioned that the staff on the labour and post-natal wards at the hospital had been outstanding so imagined they’d come back to me asking to elaborate – “what was it about my experience with the staff that made it outstanding?” or “what can we do to continue those services being outstanding?” were the types of question that instantly sprung to mind.
You can imagine my excitement to receive a reply from the Minister. Here was me – rocking the baby and cooking the dinner whilst engaging directly with decision makers at the highest level in our state. I was buzzing – THIS is what social media is so good for and why I continuously rave about the benefits of online community engagement. You are reaching people who can’t or don’t want to attend traditional meetings or make formal written submissions.
BUT. Imagine my disappointment at the simple response of “Thank you”. Ok, fair enough he was polite and I appreciate that but I felt deflated. At least my tweet was acknowledged and seemingly appreciated. But where was the chat? That was it. End of conversation. I was there – hooked in – willing to give so much more information as a consumer but I was thrown back out to sea!
So the moral of my story? I think there’s a few key lessons to be highlighted –
– Social media IS a brilliant tool for engaging with people who might not want to participate in more traditional methods. You are literally reaching out to the more silent majority and providing ways for them to feel included.
– Let’s be careful what we call a ‘chat’. A chat to me is a conversation – it’s two way. It needs to be give and take, not just take take. Yes, Twitter only provides an opportunity to exchange snippets of information in 140 characters or less, but it does provide the opportunity for a good back and forth conversation.
– Using the tool alone isn’t always enough. If you are wanting any ‘meat’ in your engagement, good facilitation is required for online engagement as well as offline.
– Don’t ignore the positives. We are often so quick to react to the negative feedback we receive that we forget to utilize and harness the positive comments we hear. I’m a big fan of an Appreciative Inquiry approach of using positive experiences to help shape future planning. We should try to practice it more often – both in our online and face-to-face engagement. If you don’t massage and pamper the people giving you positive feedback the likelihood is they will swim off in to the deep ocean and never emerge again…
It’s time for a conversation
I’m always fascinated to observe community action over issues of importance. Community activism and lobbying is usually a text book case of a frustrated community who isn’t being heard, no matter how loud they shout. So they have to shout louder. And louder. But is anyone listening?
I’ll use an example from within my local community but will hand over to wine guru (consequently a god in my eyes), James Halliday for an explanation:
“The McLaren Vale Grape Wine & Tourism Association is understandably up in arms about a proposal for South Australia’s largest home builder – Fairmont Homes – to convert 77 hectares of a total of 177 ha presently used for cereal crops into high density urban housing and the usual supermarket/warehouse/Bunnings-type shopping centres. Phase 1 would see 1200 dwellings and 2500 residents, Phase 2 yet to be disclosed. Curiously, indeed astonishingly, none of the many hundreds of pages of planning documents include any use of the key words ‘tourism, grape, food, and or wine industry’. At no point in the entire process was the community consulted about any of the decisions relating to the planning process until the obligatory ‘community consultation’ period at the end of planning. Indeed the community was not notified of the consultation period, and became aware of it two days before the closing of the process.” Read more at The Tentacles of Urban Sprawl, James Halliday, 21 September 2010
I’ll confess to not knowing all of the facts about the issue in question but know for certain that there is an angry community (in fact, several angry communities in relation to various ‘urban sprawl’ threats in South Australia at the moment) who feel that they haven’t been consulted. And if there was a consultation process, no one told them about it or gave them reasonable time to provide submissions. As we so often see, consultation processes regularly expect members of the public to provide formal written submissions in response to hefty documents without clear information as to what is negotiable, what isn’t negotiable, and so on. It’s often a complicated process that only the hardened and well resourced community member participates in, and even then it requires a decent amount of time to pull something together.
The concerned community is passionate about this topic. It’s important to them and they won’t back down. Their concern is not just the specific housing development in question but to quote local businessman James Hook, “Our region needs proper planning, not a system of sprawl out and build services later” . With the use of social media on their side, I remain regularly updated of the protest plans through pages such as ‘We Oppose Seaford Heights’ and ‘Stop Urban Sprawl – Mount Barker’ (with collectively over 1000 fans, and they are just the groups I’m aware of) and the more they are ignored, the louder and more angry these communities get.
There is growing debate within the South Australian community in relation to population growth and the impact this will have on urban development and infrastructure. But at the moment any discussions happening within Government are happening very separately to those happening in the community. The longer there is that divide, the less healthy the relationship between Government and community becomes. The less healthy that relationship, the less likely that sound, informed decisions are made. It’s a situation without a happy ending for anyone.
The solution? As simple as it sounds, I believe that a conversation is needed. Imagine a Government that opened up the opportunity for some healthy dialogue and deliberation not just between them and the community, but between the community themselves. But most importantly, a Government that strives to reach the broad community to invite them in to the conversation; provides straightforward, timely and safe spaces for healthy debate and consultation; actively listens and takes on board the issues and topics they hear from the community insight; and transparently makes decisions that are based on the conversation that has taken place. This is no easy feat and would need careful coordination and very thorough planning but with the right commitment, could certainly be achievable.
It’s a simple and very ancient philosophy on which I base all of my work in community engagement: Tell me I forget, Show me I remember, Involve me I understand. Confucius 450BC.