Originally published 6 November 2007. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
When even Blue Peter has to apologise for misleading callers to its show, and virtually every other broadcaster has had to run for cover lest its practices be placed under scrutiny, you can be sure that something pretty rotten has been discovered. And for once it’s not politicians that stand accused of misleading the public!
In fact, there are probably many senior civil servants, Government Ministers and even celebrities who are quietly satisfied that the holier-than-thou media has, for once, had its come-uppance. Programme-makers and their bosses, for their part, are fully aware of the damage to their reputation caused by the cavalier way they appear to have treated their customers; they know it will take years to restore the trust they have squandered. But before consultation professionals enjoy the discomfiture of the fourth estate, there are some relevant questions that arise from this debacle. In principle, there is little difference between telephoning Richard and Judy and finding out later that your call didn’t count because they had already decided on the winner, and writing to your local NHS Trust only to find that the decision to proceed with service changes had already effectively been taken somewhere higher up.
In both cases, the effect will be the same. Why bother? Nothing I say or do can make a difference. True, the motives for participation may be different. But the mechanics of participation are not dissimilar. We are moving rapidly towards acceptance of e-consultation and, in addition to greater use of the telephone, we are already starting to ask citizens to e-mail their views, and even to use SMS text messaging to tell us what they think. This all depends upon the process having credibility – and the citizen having confidence that he or she is not being ripped off.
Additionally, there is a deeper issue – the mistrust of bodies we formerly held in high esteem, when it comes to the presentation or interpretation of statistics. There is already an argybargy over the independence of the Office of National Statistics - and we are all accustomed to the saying lies, damned lies and statistics - but when you can’t trust the BBC or ITV to tell the truth about calls it has received, the public can be forgiven for wondering whether it can believe anyone in authority to be honest and straightforward.
Consulting stakeholders is all about confidence. If, however, they suspect that whatever they say, the PR spin machine will explain it away as endorsement for what the consultor wanted in the first place, the process is undermined.
Polls have been tainted. It will need meticulous adherence to standards and great care by public bodies of all kinds to restore public faith that all their views will be taken into account. Trigger points
- When organising polls and surveys as part of a consultation, double check that the methodology and processes meet best practice standards
- When employing third-party subcontractors, only use those that can prove adherence to professional standards
- Ensure that everyone in your organisation realises the risks involved in poorly executed polls and surveys, and are deterred from launching such exercises without proper training and guidance
This is the 81st 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