Originally published 17 March 2010. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
Like a sticky label that resists all attempts to be removed from a piece of luggage, we cling to some terms or phrases long after they have ceased being useful.
‘Hard-to-Reach’ is one such label. What’s wrong with it is the implication that it is somehow a group’s own ‘fault’ that it cannot be reached. It conjures up an image of people hiding behind a rock. ‘Seldom-Heard’ is a much better, if also imperfect phrase.
But the real significance of this phrase is that it says more about us ... than them.
Groups are seldom, objectively, ‘hard to reach’. It’s just that it is harder for some organisations than others to engage with certain stakeholders. Being ‘hard-to-reach’ is not a function of these groups, but more likely to reflect the challenge some public bodies face in building and sustaining the right relationships. This is not because they aren’t doing their jobs properly; it’s the result of their roles, their status and the way in which they are perceived.
Let’s take the Police. Despite excellent progress in community engagement in recent years, there are groups ... and there will continue to be groups ... who will not find it instinctively easy to talk to the Police. Shedding the uniform may help, and we’ve met individual policemen who have established a great rapport with local youngsters. But in general, their ability to interface with some sections of the community on their own will be limited.
The NHS, in contrast, already has to engage with all creatures great and small. But these contacts are almost all as individuals, and although there is now a legal requirement to involve representatives of the public, few Trusts have the staff and the time to seek out all those groups that are below the threshold of visibility. It’s not just ‘seldom-heard’; many are ‘seldom-seen’!
Local Authorities know them all. Or rather, one department, one unit or another knows them. Specialist public services, planned and delivered by separate departments frequently work with many groups that would be characterised as ‘hard-to-reach’ for others, but not, of course for them. They may be Gypsies and Travellers. Or Drug dependent young people. Or single mothers. Or housebound dementia-sufferers.
Lists of these groups – and their contacts details – may be jealously guarded by those who have developed and nurtured long-term relationships with them. Although everyone sees the need to consolidate lists (it reduces duplication and addresses consultation fatigue) there can be anxiety that fools may rush in where patience and prudence has slowly developed an empathy with these groups
That ‘empathy’ is important with so-called ‘hard-to-reach’ groups. That’s why market research firms, when given a contract to engage with these groups dispense with the ‘men in suits’ and recruit researchers who can relate to people from very different backgrounds, or with very different challenges. In other words, to understand these groups fully, and to enable the public bodies for whom we work to respond to their needs and aspirations – we need to be a little less like us – and more like them
New legislation – including the Equality Bill currently in Parliament – recognises that much of the discrimination felt by some groups has been quite subtle, and in the field of public consultation also, no-one has set out to exclude those sections of the community that may be ‘hard-to-reach’. Instead, they’ve been omitted simply because the dialogue methods we choose to use are less suitable for them. With tighter budgets in coming years, there is even greater danger that one-size-fits-all consultations will be assumed to be ok for everyone. They aren’t.
There are few short-cuts. If stakeholder mapping or similar techniques shows that seldom-heard groups are likely to be seriously impacted by your plans or policies, you have to invest in finding and implementing the most appropriate ways of building and developing the relevant relationships. It may mean specialist knowledgeable staff, different processes, or even longer timescales.
Those who make such an investment will gradually find that groups become less ‘hard-to-reach’. Remember the label is not a function of the groups themselves – but a reflection of whether or not we’ve invested to remove it.
Trigger points
- Many public bodies will be impacted by The Equality Bill; become familiar with it now.
- The next opportunity to spend a day considering the issue raised in this Topic will be the Institute's Engaging the Hard-to-Reach seminar.
This is the 157th 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