Consultation is part of a long chain of communications. What happens when important links in the chain are broken?

Twelve years ago, the term “broken links” was new – part of the new vocabulary that arrived with the advent of the internet. By now we all relate to it as that infuriating moment when you click on a reference, an icon or even a web address and you receive that wonderful piece of Microsoft prose: The page cannot be displayed ….

In time there arose an industry – specialist technology firms with ever more sophisticated tools to detect and sometimes repair these so-called broken links! Oh, for such facilities to mend the broken links in other aspects of consultation!

For, as with internet sites, the more complex the communication, the greater is the likelihood that intricate relationships can break down. Maybe all once worked well together, but something changed, and no-one spotted the implications of making the change and a key dependency was missed. Sometimes, the link never worked properly; it was designed but never fully tested, and no-one pointed out the error.

Consultation can involve an extended chain of communications. Those who organise a formal consultation exercise may themselves be bit part players in an even more convoluted chain of people engaged in policy-making. Consider, for example, a Government department working alongside other departments and agencies to develop a new policy on an issue that crosses functional boundaries. Brexit springs to mind! Or think about a local Planning Authority trying to pull together varying strands of policy on issues affecting their area, long before going to formal consultation.

Bearing such chains in mind, is it any wonder that, on occasions, what emerges in a consultation seems, to well-informed stakeholders, divorced from the reality of a situation they know well? We’ve all probably noticed that involving too many different interests whilst drafting a document, and having to concede a token mention to everyone’s pet peccadillo, results in obscuring rather than clarifying messages. It’s as if a game of Chinese whispers has distorted the message or perhaps three committees too many have resulted in a consultation paper that is a lowest-common denominator position.

Take note of the times when a third party research company is employed to carry out a consultation. Some of these are, of course perfectly good, but ask stakeholders whether they prefer to persuade the consultor’s research team or a chance to persuade the ultimate decision-maker, and obviously they prefer the latter. Much, however, depends on the perceived closeness between the decision-maker and those who consult on his or her behalf. Advisers can be critical influencers. Years ago, when Tony Blair was Prime Minister, it was accepted by all that if you could get the ear of his closest adviser, Alistair Campbell, you might be half way or more towards a favourable decision from the Prime Minister.  Since Theresa May fired Nick Timothy after the last Election, we are not at all sure who she might listen to most!

This is all about linkages….between those who understand the issues and those who will have to prepare the consultation options …between those who devise the consultation process and those who analyse and interpret the output ….and between those who meet and talk with stakeholders… and those who take the real decisions. And ultimately between officials and elected politicians.

If these links are tenuous, or if they become weakened over time, it can damage the integrity of the consultation process, or undermine stakeholders’ confidence that their views are being taken into account. As in the online world, broken links can sometimes lurk undetected for ages because there are alternative workarounds, but eventually they will surface and cause embarrassment. The web surfer may think again before using a particular website, or a particular online service. By analogy, stakeholders who lose confidence in the integrity of your linkages may need persuasion to ever again participate in your consultations.

This article is based on a Tuesday Topic first published in 2006.