Originally published 11 February 2009. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
A nurse offers to pray for a sick patient; two comedians overstep the mark on a radio show; another TV personality utters an unacceptable term in the “green” room. When, in the first case a Health Authority reacts, and the BBC in the other cases take action, it prompts an intense public debate. Clearly, there is no consensus as to what is an appropriate response.
Quite possibly, these types of decisions are amongst the most difficult judgements that senior managers have to make in the public sector. Being beastly to bankers is now probably the only non-contentious criticism of a group of people that one can imagine being acceptable, as commentators and public officials struggle to balance the desire to call a spade a spade without causing gratuitous offence. Simultaneously and alongside the individual cases when a “celeb” says or does something wrong, we have an increasingly long list of groups whose sensitivities we have only recently learnt to observe. Gradually we have learnt not to be patronising, and to enter into professional dialogue with them. We have also learnt that issues of great concern to some of these groups need to feature higher up the political agenda.
Just consider the last few weeks. A major Report on childhood asserts that many of our social problems stem from inadequate parenting. At the opposite end of the age spectrum, an important study into the prevalence of dementia among the older generation considers the serious impact this may have on us all. On the consequences of the credit crunch, there is no need for papers and reports to appreciate the anger and frustration of UK employees anxious for their jobs.
All these situations – whether individual or collective – pose challenges for policy-makers, at both local and national levels. As often as not, long-standing assumptions go by the board, and the search is on for a reasonable consensus. It is particularly difficult with dramatic social mood swings – sometimes manipulated by the media but, at other times, just reflecting the volatile state of public opinion.
It is at this time that smart public bodies can rely upon relationships and consultative machinery that gives them access to the public view. It may not be foolproof, but having a Citizens Panel gives a Council a means of taking the local temperature; working with an effective LINks network might equally be of value to Health Trusts; neighbourhood policing consultations can act as a similar safety-valve for Police and other public safety services.
Not all consultation needs to be pre-planned, and subject to six, nine or twelve weeks ... There is nothing wrong with mounting a rapid-response exercise on topical or urgent issues. In the last few days, Authorities have had to decide whether or not to keep schools open in the snow; they may also be wondering how to prioritise highway clearance operations as their stocks of salt and grit run low. How much better is it if Chief Officers and Portfolio-holders have a sense of the public mood through using available channels of consultation ... rather than try to guess whether the local newspaper editor is representative or not?
The more difficult a decision is, the more valuable it can be to have machinery to hand that can give decision-makers an insight into the views of various stakeholders. The general public may be the relevant constituency in the quoted examples, but there are other issues where technical or professional input is most relevant. In both cases, public bodies with a reference point against which to judge their management response have a huge advantage compared to those that don’t.
Around the corner may lurk an unforeseen scenario involving people from any number of groups – some of which consider themselves disadvantaged, and who will interpret any unfavourable treatment as an attack upon their members or those who identify with them. Public bodies who prepare for such eventualities will find it is yields a great return on investment. Trigger points
- How robust is your consultative machinery with relevant groups or communities of interest?
- Have you a satisfactory relationship with key opinion-formers and relevant representative bodies?
- Consider attending the Institute’s forthcoming event on Consultation with Faith Groups.
This is the 129th Tuesday Topic; a full list of subjects covered is available for Institute members and is a valuable resource covering so many aspects of consultation and engagement