Consultation interruptus...? - What happens when something unexpected happens during a consultation?

Not so long ago, a public consultation was a reasonably predictable process.

We prepared a suitable document, outlining the problem and maybe a series of possible solutions. It was published and supported by a range of data gathering methods ranging from questionnaires through to public meetings or an online discussion. Not every exercise lasted 12 weeks but most of those that fell within successive versions of the Government Code of Practice did so. At the end of that time, responses would be gathered together, analysed, a Report prepared and the focus moved to the decision-makers. Simples!

Three things have changed: • News management and media relations in general have moved to a 24/7 hours non-stop environment. Once a controversial news story gathers momentum, issues become very fast-moving and often unpredictable. • Social media means that debates are conducted away from the consultor’s control or influence. Arguments and counter-arguments, assertions and rebuttals flow incessantly in the ether. • Unhappy consultees and campaigners are increasingly turning to the Courts to challenge both the substance of an issue or the process by which decisions are taken.

Those familiar with the Institute’s definition of consultation will have noticed that it starts with the words “Consultation is the dynamic process of dialogue ...” and possibly we have never paid enough attention to that word “dynamic”. If it ever was a static process, it certainly is not so today, and this has serious implications for everybody concerned.

So what can change during the course of a consultation? • The argument may change. It could be that a major influencer says or does something that changes the focus of the debate. The media is all-powerful and can alight upon just one aspect of a wide-ranging discussion and, from that moment onwards, this becomes the main part of the argument. Notice, for example, how the dreadful events at Mid-Staffordshire have made many current consultations in the NHS more centred around patient safety. • The parties or the stakeholders may change. Some individuals or organisations have the clout to affect a consultation just through the act of participating in it. Notice how the arrival of the National Trust aggressively arguing its corner dramatically changed the nature of the Forestry consultation some years ago, and led to its withdrawal. • The context may change. The external environment affects the climate for debate. In times of austerity, the public seems resigned to accept change that, in better times it might be tempted to resist. But public attitudes can change almost overnight. Note how recent revelations about the tax affairs of multi-nationals like Google, Amazon and Starbucks have very quickly altered public perceptions. Had there been a consultation about tax avoidance on-going in recent weeks, imagine how the change of mood-music would have affected it.

Some mid-consultation developments are of course a surprise. But others are highly predictable. Sometimes it is only a matter of studying the political calendar and asking oneself, What happens if the Budget says such-and such? Or, to take a recent and topical example, What happens when a new NHS organisation takes over on April 1st?

Unexpected or not, those planning consultations absolutely must try to anticipate events. There is too much at stake to publish, be damned and hope for the best. For promoters of vast expensive infrastructure projects, delay caused by a disputed or ineffective consultation can cost hundreds of millions of pounds. For those trying to implement difficult or unpopular changes to public services, there is a premium in having a broadly consensual agreement - initiatives that are opposed have a tougher time being implemented than those with relatively widespread support.

There are many ways to anticipate. One is to role-play the planned consultation. Gather together well-informed colleagues, ask them to act out how different stakeholders or other relevant bodies will react to the consultation. What will they say? What will they do? Who will they involve? What impact will they achieve? From this you may have clues as to how the argument may develop. Will one particular aspect dominate? Will mass public opinion be aroused? How will the media report the story? Will politicians become significant players?

Although this helps, it will not preclude surprises. It is therefore better to accept that many things may change, and that the consultation project plan has to be flexible enough to accommodate this. It means responding quickly to emerging requirements – for more documentation, for additional public events, for supplementary information, or for extra funding. In fact, the whole process should now be based upon a willingness to re-state the case in the latter stages of an exercise if the early part of the debate has highlighted issues or questions that clearly need further consideration.

Far from bemoaning such a development, we should welcome it as a sure sign that a consultation is doing its job – exposing matters of public interest to genuine debate and ensuring that before decisions are made, that all relevant viewpoints have been gathered and conscientiously considered.

Trigger Points

• Have you experienced consultations which were affected by unexpected events?
• Is your project planning flexible enough to cope with changes mid-consultation
• A tCI ‘compliance assessment’ is one way to ensure that account is taken of the need to prepare for changes mid-consultation. Talk to Martin Roach (01767318350) if interested.
• Have you tried anticipatory role-playing? If not, tCI can help or make suggestions
• If you found this of interest, you may also like to read Topic 223: Not quite force majeure

This is the 238th 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