Stakeholder Engagement Resource Hub

Engagement is not a substitute word for consultation. IAP2 have developed a flexible framework - the IAP2 Spectrum, that explains the different levels of engagement that we can use to engage our customers, stakeholders and community.

An engagement colleague Max Hardy has shared his reflections on the IAP2 Spectrum:

What is it?

It is a framework that explains the different levels of engagement that organisations can engage their stakeholders/communities. The further to the right on the Spectrum, the greater the influence the community has to influence decision-making. At each level a different promise to the community applies – a promise that decision-makers can be held accountable to. Each level requires a different type of interaction.

The Inform level simply offers to provide information throughout a process about work being undertaken by an internal or expert team leading up to a decision being made. The promise is simply keeping people informed – some would say it is about helping people to understand. No input or feedback is sought from the community of interest.

The Consult level is about putting forward options or a proposal for which feedback is sought. The promise is to listen to the community of interest’s feedback, to carefully consider, then make decisions and finally explain how this feedback has been taken into account.

The Involve level invites input and ideas from the community to help develop options/potential solutions. The community participates earlier in the process than for the consult level. The community is part of developing solutions, not merely commenting about plans or solutions being proposed by an organisation. Ultimately the organisation will still make decisions, but they promise that the decisions will be informed by ideas and input.

The Collaborate level is a significant jump. It’s about partnering and sharing power – to the maximum extent possible (a phrase that has been used, confused and misused). It takes more time and effort. A range of stakeholders/community members work together with the sponsoring organisation to define the scope of the decision to be made, to develop options, to assess those options against agreed criteria in an attempt to arrive at consensus. Although more time consuming and expensive it is the shortest route to an implementable solution for highly complex/controversial decisions.

The Empower level is essentially delegated decision-making. It is where an organisation promises to do whatever the ‘community of interest’ decides.

Some common misunderstandings of the Spectrum

1.  You start at the left and go right. Some have misunderstood the framework completely, thinking that you start off Informing, then you Consult, then you Involve etc. It’s a framework and a not a process guide.

2.  At the Inform level a decision has already been made (like the DAD approach; Decide Announce and Defend). It may seem like a subtle difference but this is not the case. At the Inform level the public is kept informed about progress being made by an internal working group, until a decision is made. No input or feedback is sough – people are just progressively informed about what is going on.

3.  Once a level is selected that is what you have to do throughout. This is not necessarily the case. IAP2 does not actually stipulate this, but those trained in the IAP2 Certificate are told that it is very important to work out the highest level on the Spectrum you will go for any given process. All the levels to the left of that level also apply.

4.  The further to the right on the Spectrum the better it is. This was never the intention and it is why the Spectrum runs left to right – so that it does not appear to be a hierarchy like Arnstein’s Ladder. IAP2 has attempted to convey through the training, that it depends. It is about finding the most appropriate level. Trying to Collaborate on something fairly straightforward, where there is little passion or complexity, would be a waste of time. Doing a simple Consult level process for something highly complex will probably result in having to start all over again, after having done some damage.

5.  It is up to the organisation to decide what level, and be clear about it, then everything should run smoothly. In my experience this is nonsense. The level often needs to be negotiated, and communities have shown that they can challenge the level of engagement, especially when particular stakeholder groups have been overlooked in the process.

Happy to chat about how you may use the Spectrum in your engagement program. Karyn - 0429 040 951

Online engagement is going gang busters. IAP2 have compiled a useful list of resources in one place.

GHD have produced a wonderful resource to help you to consider a range of digital engagement options. GHD shares that storytelling is a powerful way to share information, create understanding and foster genuine collaboration and that COVID has shown us more people are willing to try online ways of connecting.  Consider 3D models, animated videos and augmented reality (AR) which are really useful tools to convey concept projects and support engagement efforts.  

Check out the resource here.

Sharing A Guide to Engaging in Disaster Recovery, released in 2015 by IAP2 Australasia.

This guide is intended for anyone involved in a disaster recovery situation – community leaders, politicians, engagement practitioners, workers from specialised agencies, those without prior recover experience or for experienced professionals working in a community they are unfamiliar with. The content focuses on the ‘human’ element of recovering, examining the importance of effective engagement, and identifying useful strategies that maximise the potential for sustained, strategic disaster recovery that is genuinely community-led.

This Energy Charter #BetterTogether initiative enables collaboration within the energy sector towards shaping business culture and decision making based on the voice of the customer. We hope the energy sector finds that this toolkit can be used far and wide to encourage better engagement with Australians. You can access the Toolkit here. Feedback always welcome.

Thriving Communities Partnership and Thinkrum have shared some practical tips and tools to consider when you are facilitating meetings and events. Here are some of the best:

1. Before a meeting, ask if there are communications preferences (online, offline, hybrid etc.) to ensure every staff member can contribute and engage effectively
2. Identify a note taker for meetings or install captions
3. Where possible, provide content prior to the meeting to create clearer communication and better prepare your staff
4. Think about the location of your staff and if it is possible to collaborate in person to assist those who might prefer this
5. Utilise accessibility features like the “immersive reader” on Microsoft whiteboard and Google’s “jamboard” to provide more inclusive support for staff with diverse need

Here is the full list.

Adequate or good community engagement is not about reaching complete consensus or giving the community or a particular stakeholder group their preferred outcome on a project (although sometimes not getting the outcome they want is the reason why some stakeholders criticise a project or it engagement processes). After all, good community engagement should consider the needs and preferences of all stakeholders, and reflect their feedback and needs in the decisions and outcome.

Read more here