Aha! Consulting
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Services >
      • Facilitation
      • Engagement
      • Strategy & Change
  • Training and Events
    • Upcoming events
    • Organisational Training
    • Engagement Training
    • Resilience Training
  • Blog
  • Resources
    • Keypoint System Hire
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Unified Dialogue

Making Engagement Normal

12/6/2019

1 Comment

 
​“How do I get my boss/manager/elected member to get this engagement thing?”
 
I would love to get paid for every time I have heard this!
 
There can be a world of difference between an engagement practitioner’s passion for engagement and an organisation’s willingness (and capability) to do anything with that passion. Indeed, some engagement practitioners are so passionate about their work that they want their organisation to run well before it can walk. The more charismatic engagement practitioners score some quick wins, only to find the multi-headed hydra of change resistance rises from the depth of the organisational culture to tear down those hard-fought-for wins.
 
Based on our experience working with organisations to take the steps needed to ‘embed’ engagement there are few key learnings that may be worth considering. The first is that something that may seem self-evident but it is amazing how often people forget that making engagement normal within organisations is about engaging people within the organisation. I starts with turning all of those skills and passions for engaging communities and stakeholders outside the organisation and bringing them into the organisation.
Picture
 
For us that process always starts with the following four questions:
 
(1)What does engagement need to achieve to be of value to the organisation?
 
Engagement is predicated on the need for the process to be meaningful for the community and stakeholders and while this should never change, the best way to avoid tokenistic engagement and to strengthen the organisation’s desire to engage, is to ensure the outcomes and processes are meaningful for the organisation. 
 
(2)What does quality engagement look like from the organisation’s point of view?
 
This question flows on from the first and asks the organisation to get more specific about what quality engagement looks like. One issue with engagement is when decision makers dismiss the engagement outcomes by trying to invalidate the process as a whole. More often than not, it is because there is not a clear and agreed measure of quality.
 
(3)What does quality engagement look like from the community/stakeholder point of view?
 
Engagement is not one way and the quality lens, likewise, needs to look out as much as it looks in. There is nothing like asking the organisation to put itself in the shoes of the community to deepen the understanding of how they might engage.
 
(4)What is the organisation’s current engagement mindset and what does it need to be?
 
You can’t define the change you want, without defining the change you want! Embedding engagement is no different and there is no one size fits all; each organisation will be at different stages and have different drivers and goals. While there are some still having the debate about the need for engagement, there are certainly many more that have already recognised its value and benefit.
 
Organisations first ask ‘why’, then they ask ‘how’ and then some even ask, ‘how else’. 
 
Over our time working with embedding engagement , we have discovered four main approaches that organisations take to engagement and that having a conversation internally about the kind of approach you currently take and the one that you want to take/need to take is a critical first step when wanting to make engagement normal.
 

​​

​BASELINE ENGAGEMENT – ‘We engage because we are told to’
  • Baseline engagement is characterised by applying the minimum level of engagement to meet compliance requirements (e.g. accreditation, statutory or regulatory requirements).
  • At its most basic level, achieving compliance is a greater focus than the quality of engagement.
 
RESPONSIVE ENGAGEMENT – ‘We engage because we have to’
  • Responsive engagement is characterised by a response to something that has already happened.
  • The organisation waits until they need to engage and responds primarily to mitigate risks and/or defend a decision.
 
PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT – 'We engage because we want to'
  • Pro-active engagement is undertaken early in any project or discussion cycle because the value and benefit of engagement are known and can be realised.
LEADING ENGAGEMENT – ‘We engage because it is how we do business’
  • Leading engagement is about an organisation that is leading their sector in engagement practice.
  • Their focus is not just on getting the job done but in continually improving how engagement occurs, not just for their business but for the whole sector.
 
Picture


​As a way to support you to make engagement normal in your neck of the woods, this dial can be downloaded here.
​
Picture
1 Comment

The Orbits of Implementation

26/1/2019

5 Comments

 
​A number of years ago, Lorenz Aggens offered us the Orbits of Participation. A concentric circle model that explores the different roles and types of influence community members and stakeholders might have in relation to project decision making. His Orbits of Participation laid out five different roles that show an increasing level of influence from those that are at most ‘Aware’ of the project but not seeking or likely to have any influence; to those who might be ‘Reviewers’ of any options, outcome or report; followed by those who would be ‘Advisors’ to the project, offering either expertise or local knowledge to those who are the ‘Creators’ of the options being considered and finally the closest to the project are the ‘Decision Makers’.
 
The orbits of participation It is an elegant model and one that is used around the world as a stakeholder mapping tool. These orbits offer an important perspective on influence over decision making and even on different roles that may assist with balancing power differentials, e.g. shifting people closer to or further away from the decision maker role.
 
However, the orbits of participation stop at the decision making and don’t flow through to implementation. For many projects, getting to the decision is an important goal but when the decision relates to services and program, implementation is where the real work begins. A recent engagement program within the Health Sector on a Healthy Weight Action Plan brought this to fact into the spotlight. As we mapped the engagement process, we knew that we could not talk about the decision making process without talking about implementation.
 
Strategies and plans are important, but it is often the implementation where things fall over.
 
Thus, the Orbits of Implementation were born. The obits of implementation are an exploration of the different roles and levels of influence that people and organisations may have over the delivery of any given plan, strategy or initiative.
 
In the tradition of Aggens, they follow the same concentric circle model but brings its focus to implementation. They are not offered as a replacement for the Orbits of Participation but as a complement;
Picture
​Evaluators: The people who will help review the initiative’s efficacy
 
Champions: The people of standing who will bring attention to the importance of the initiative
 
Deliverers: The people on the ground who will deliver the initiative
 
Coordinators: The people responsible for planning and maintaining the delivery
 
Funders/Sponsors: The people who will fund and or sponsor the initiative 
​While the case could be made for a different order, the following rationale is provided for the layout:
 
  • Funders/Sponsors: Without funders or sponsors any project or initiative is dead. As such, while they may have less direct involvement in the implementation, they are central to it going ahead.
  •  Coordinators: They are the people who are the closest and most influential to the initiative as they help to set up the systems, process and pace of what is being delivered.
  •  Deliverers: They are the ones closest to or at the coal face who have the direct responsibility for the consistency of the delivery and the alignment to the project’s/initiative’s objectives. They experience firsthand the practicalities of what is needed for its delivery. They carry significant influence, either through their alignment to the initiative’s objectives or in opposition to it.
  •  Champions: They bring their ability and willingness to influence others and support the project/initiative. Their role is about brining other to the project and to be advocates and ambassadors within their own circles of influence. While their influence the more outward than on the project, it can be argued that their willingness to offer this type support would be limited by how much influence they have had on the project design (see Orbits of Participation).
  •  Evaluators: They carry their own realm of influence and it could be argued that, being more removed from implementation, places them in a more neutral position from which to conduct the evaluation. In most cases, their influence, while critical, is less immediate.
 
How to use the orbits
 
If you have an engagement project where implementation is a key risk, consider the Orbits of Influence alongside the Orbits of Participation. It is common that people’s willingness to take on an implementation roles is limited by their level of involvement in the original decision making process.
 
For example: You may find that involving people as ‘Creators’ (Orbits of Participation) may be a useful way to build a group of ‘Champions’ (Orbits of Implementation) when it comes to implementation.
 
So. mapping the desired required implementation role can help identified if there are people that have been left out of the decision making process or may even influence what role they have in that process.  

We have found it a useful tool and interested in your reflections as you get to know the orbits.
​
You can download a template of the Orbits of Implementation here
5 Comments

Leadership in Engagement

21/6/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
​At a recent International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) breakfast in WA, three leaders presented their views on leadership in engagement; their insights were too valuable not to be shared more widely. The speakers were:
  • Dr Shayne Silcox,  CEO of the City of Melville
  • Anthony Vuleta, CEO of the Town of Victoria Park
  • Catherine Ferrari, General Manager Customer and Community, Water Corporation

This is what I gleaned from their contributions:
​
  1. Back your staff

Rather than having every decision go through management, this approach is about giving staff the authority to use their expertise and understanding. 
Dr Silcox called this an empowerment warrant.  Which was not just about working with the understanding that staff should trust their judgment but making it clear to them that he will back them, when they do.
  1. Make it a living policy

Having an engagement policy was seen as an important step in having your staff on the same page BUT the policy needs to be lived. This means that it needs to be up for review and that staff are given the chance to practise and apply it.

Mr Vuleta has given staff from across the organisation the chance to be trained and get involved in engagement projects. There are people facilitating workshops from across the whole organisation, at the same time not learning an engagement policy exist but how it is lived and breathed in real life.
Make it organisation-wide

While organisations may have a team of people with engagement expertise, engagement is not something that is just for them.  Ms Ferrari made the point that different parts of the organisation can begin to think that ‘engagement is their job’ but the fact is, engagement is everybody’s job. 
The more your technical/project people have the responsibility and exposure to engagement the better they understand how it works in their context. 

Make that case for engagement

What was truly surprising was that all three leaders were genuinely confused that other leaders could not or did not see the inherent value in engagement. It was noted that at times it does take a painful and sometime public failure to trigger that awareness but in the reality of all the management fads to come and go, engagement is one of the only truly NEW and constructive paradigms to be offered to organisations.

As such, there is value in backing your staff to build skills and understanding. Not everyone needs to be the ‘expert’ but most people need some understanding.
In all these cases these leaders have invested in in-house training and staff development. This was made available not just for communications and engagement staff but for the technical /project people and leadership as well.  

​The Town of Victoria Park now have nine people who have completed the IAP2 Certificate of Engagement and 70 people who have done the one day IAP2 Engagement Essentials course, making the language of engagement more widely accessible and understood across the whole organisation. Their councillors have also completed a 2hr ‘Understanding engagement’ workshop


To find out more about IAP2 training for your organisation.
0 Comments

    Archives

    April 2020
    March 2020
    December 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    September 2018
    May 2018
    May 2017
    March 2017
    June 2016
    April 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015

    View my profile on LinkedIn

    Categories

    All
    Decision Making
    Engaging Communities
    Faciliation
    Human Relationships
    IAP2
    Joel Levin
    Leadership In Engagement
    Self Care
    Vivian Garde

    RSS Feed

Picture
PO Box 2031 
Yokine South Western Australia 6060

Picture
+61 8 9443 9474 
Privacy Policy 
Payment Terms and Conditions 
ABN: 377 266 15805
STAY  CONNECTED
Submit

Events & Updates

Sign up for event updates and occasional news.
Subscribe
Picture
Contact Us
Copyright Aha! Consulting 2015
BACK TO TOP