Originally published 6 November 2007. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
Major re-generation projects these days are always the subject of consultation, and the same goes for less comprehensive urban re-development.
Other changes to our communities are also supposed to be preceded by public debate; this covers proposed alterations to policing, schools, health centres or hospitals. So, assiduous residents or local representative organisations who have their fingers on the pulse, should not have been taken by surprise when change occurs. Yet here is the paradox. Despite a massive increase in the prevalence of consultation, there are still those who either missed it, weren't interested or can't be bothered, but then profoundly dislike what's proposed. These are the "sleepers" who only awake when projects move from their planning phase to their implementation phase. So here is the question - do those who have organised an effective consultation have a further responsibility to positively engage with those who are going to be impacted by significant change? Or is that someone else's responsibility?
Consider the position found in many parts of the NHS. Managers work out how services need to be adjusted ("re-configured" is the jargon of choice!) and consult the public on their plans. At some stage, however, these have to be implemented and no amount of dialogue on the overall concept can substitute for involving those who will be affected when change actually kicks in.
There are two approaches. One is to argue that the time for debate and discussion is now over. Those who had misgivings have had their chance to voice their concerns, but now that schemes have been approved, the focus of engagement is on providing information; advising people of how and when the change will affect them. In the NHS example, imagine the consolidation of several GP practices into a single Health Centre. Consultation is now over, so the implementation phase is all about notifying patients that from a particular date, their primary care gets delivered from the new location. Can I order a thousand standard letters please?
But there is an alternative. Of course, people who are going to be impacted need to be informed, but they may also need to be consulted. Not the formal, written, long-drawn-out form of consultation, but the informal, personal, flexible version. Seasoned project managers understand that smooth implementation needs the co-operation of those affected. Identifying them early is key, as is approaching them in the correct manner, be they tenants, passengers, patients, householders or whatever
In the implementation phase, the principle is no longer up for grabs, but there are always options when it comes to implementation. Detailed matters of design, of timing or phasing can offer ways of accommodating individual issues and in any event, those most impacted often have good ideas which project managers find very useful. That's because they are closest to what happens on the ground, and no matter how brilliant the original consultation, it is the implementation phase that provides this reality check
Trigger points
- Examine your organisation's policies on public engagement during project implementation.
- Provide training for Project managers in consultation techniques.
- Always ensure those who are most affected are identified early.
This is the94th 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