When One Consultation Is Not the Only Conversation in Town

Public consultation is rarely a standalone exercise. In local and central government, it often takes place alongside other engagement activity, policy development, and formal consultations being run by different parts of the same organisation. Local government reorganisation, budget setting, active travel schemes, service redesigns, workforce change. Each may be appropriate in its own right. The challenge arises when these activities overlap without sufficient coordination, creating cumulative pressure on stakeholders and internal systems alike.

The risk is not simply volume. It is the difficulty of maintaining clarity, coherence, and confidence when multiple conversations are unfolding at once.

The Limits of Treating Consultations in Isolation

Consultation planning often focuses on the quality and legality of each individual exercise. That focus is necessary, but not always sufficient.

In practice, residents, staff, members, campaign groups, and partners engage with organisations as a whole, rather than as a series of discrete projects. Where multiple consultations run in parallel, people may reasonably struggle to understand how they relate to one another, what decisions are genuinely open to influence, and how their input will be used.

This issue has been reflected in consultation feedback published by the Welsh Government, where respondents have highlighted disengagement when consultations appear overlapping or poorly connected. The concern raised is not opposition to engagement itself, but uncertainty about purpose, sequencing, and impact.

That context matters. It does not invalidate consultation activity, but it does place a greater responsibility on organisations to explain how different exercises fit together and why they are being undertaken when they are.

Fatigue Is a Risk, Confusion Is a Warning Sign

Consultation fatigue is a familiar concern, particularly during periods of sustained change. However, fatigue alone is not the most significant indicator of risk.

More consequential is confusion. Where different parts of an organisation use inconsistent language, operate to different timelines, or articulate different rationales for change, stakeholders may struggle to engage meaningfully, even where consultation materials are well designed.

This challenge is especially acute in complex governance environments. Guidance from the Local Government Association on council tax and budget consultation in two tier areas notes that residents already find it difficult to distinguish responsibilities between tiers of government. Parallel consultations in that context increase the importance of clarity about who is deciding what, and why.

Confusion should be treated as an early warning signal. It suggests a need to pause, align, or explain more carefully, rather than simply intensifying communications activity.

Coordination Is a Leadership Responsibility, With Communications Managing the Consequences

Overlapping consultations are sometimes characterised as a communications challenge. That framing is incomplete.

In many organisations, communications teams identify emerging risks early. They see narrative clashes, stakeholder frustration, and reputational exposure developing across multiple programmes. What they often lack is the authority to reshape decisions that have already been agreed elsewhere.

Decisions about when and how to consult are usually taken within service areas, programme boards, or policy teams, each acting appropriately within its own remit. Without a senior mechanism to review cumulative impact, coordination becomes accidental rather than deliberate.

This creates a structural tension. Communications teams are responsible for maintaining clarity and trust, but do not control the conditions that most affect them.

Expectations set out by the Cabinet Office emphasise that consultation should be proportionate and sensitive to context. Meeting that expectation requires leadership oversight of the full engagement landscape, not just compliance within individual projects.

Where coordination works well, it is typically because:

• Senior leaders have visibility of significant engagement activity across the organisation
• Communications are involved early as advisers on risk and sequencing
• There is a clear route for adjusting timing or scope when cumulative impact becomes a concern

Without these conditions, communications activity is forced into a reactive role, managing the effects of decisions rather than shaping them.

Compliance Is Necessary, But Context Still Matters

Ensuring that each consultation meets its legal and procedural requirements is essential. It is also only part of the picture.

Scrutiny bodies, inspectors, and the public often consider engagement in the round. They look for consistency of approach, clarity of intent, and evidence that organisations are listening as well as asking.

The Institute for Government has repeatedly highlighted the fragility of public trust in decision making, particularly during periods of sustained reform. In that environment, the way consultations are sequenced and explained can be as important as their individual design.

Recognising cumulative impact does not undermine consultation. It strengthens it, by reinforcing the duty to act proportionately and transparently.

Practical Steps to Reduce Risk and Improve Engagement

There is no single solution, but there are practical steps that make a material difference.

• First, maintain an organisation wide view of engagement activity, including statutory consultations, informal engagement, and politically sensitive communications.
• Second, test how multiple consultations will be experienced together, not just how they perform individually.
• Third, be explicit with stakeholders about context. Where other changes are underway, acknowledge them and explain how different processes relate.
• Finally, empower teams to raise concerns and adjust plans. Treat coordination as part of good governance, not as a secondary communications task.

A Final Reflection

The challenge is not that organisations consult too often. It is that consultation increasingly takes place within complex, fast moving environments where cumulative effects are easy to overlook. In those conditions, coordination becomes a leadership responsibility. Not to avoid consultation, but to ensure it remains meaningful, proportionate, and trusted.

Stakeholders already engage with organisations as a whole.

Effective consultation requires organisations to do the same.

---

---

How tCI Can Help

Organisation Wide Learning Hub Access
Equip your entire team with professional consultation skills through one platform. Self paced courses, live virtual classrooms, practical toolkits and expert resources that build a shared baseline of competence across your organisation. Trusted by councils, NHS bodies and regulators nationwide.

Bespoke Training Workshops
Training that works with your real projects, not hypothetical scenarios. Sector tailored sessions help teams apply good practice to live challenges: sharpening consultation documents, building defensible codebooks, strengthening equality analyses. Half day or full day workshops for health, local government, planning and public service teams.

Coaching for Complex or High Risk Consultations

Expert guidance when the stakes are highest. One to one and small group coaching for senior officers navigating legally exposed or politically contentious decisions. Strengthen your judgement on proportionality, evidence standards and challenge management. Essential for organisations that may face judicial review risk or major service changes.

Whether you’re preparing for a high stakes service change, building long term consultation capability, or need confidence that your evidence approach will stand up to scrutiny, we can help.

Contact tCI: hello@consultationinstitute.org