Participation handbook

Developing an engagement strategy

Engagement is the direct activity we take to create opportunities for people to participate in policy, service design and decision-making processes. An ‘engagement strategy’ is the wider plan for this work and the context in which effective opportunities for participation are undertaken. Its overall aim is to ensure that participatory work takes place at a time and in a form which maximises its impact on government decision-making, in line with the offer you are making to participants.

Government officials will need to play a role in the development of an effective engagement strategy – in particular, ensuring that there is buy-in from key decision-makers and that there are genuine opportunities for participant influence on an issue.

This section provides key information that it is helpful for you to understand in order to commission participatory work that includes the development of an engagement strategy, and to work collaboratively with a contractor that has specialist skills in this field to do so.

Ideally you should work collaboratively with a contractor to develop an engagement strategy at the beginning of a delivery process, so that a contractor is fully informed about the wider timescales and opportunities for influence in your policy area. It is important to identify the best timing and staging for different, proportionate engagement activities and plan for them accordingly. This may be an iterative process and you should factor in time to work with a contractor to re-visit an engagement strategy.

In practice, identifying opportunities for engagement is often a neglected part of the delivery cycle and is instigated responsively when needs arise. Be aware of this risk, and take action at the earliest possible stage. Set out in your Invitation to Tender (ITT) what your engagement strategy requirements are likely to be, and prioritise discussing this with the appointed contractor.

In developing an engagement strategy, it is important to recognise that engagement is a process, not just the outreach activity.

You may find it useful to draw on the National Standards for Community Engagement VOiCE software, designed to support the planning, delivery and review of well-constructed, managed and evaluated engagement.

High-level purpose

Your engagement strategy will initially need to set out the high-level purpose and intentions of your work. This will involve considering:

• the why – the reasons you have for choosing to open up an issue, question or decision-making process to wider participation
• the difference made – linking the outcomes of these activities to decision-making processes, service delivery and/or social change

It is important that you make analysts in your policy area aware of your proposed engagement work at the earliest possible stage, so they can advise most effectively and inform you if there is existing evidence or research activity relevant to your work. You may also wish to commission a literature review in advance of deciding whether to undertake piece of participatory work – analysts can advise on this. You can then discuss details and practicalities with analysts either to inform the development of your engagement strategy, or once you have considered each step of your engagement strategy.

You should also contact the Digital Engagement team at the earliest possible stage, so that they are aware of your work and can advise on digital methods for engaging with the public and stakeholders.

Planning engagement activities

With these key questions answered, you can further develop your engagement strategy to consider practical details of each activity. Developing an effective engagement strategy to facilitate participation, especially in a complex policy area, is likely to contain a range of different activities at different levels, at different points in the delivery cycle.

Use the steps below as building blocks for your engagement strategy. Each step should form a section of the strategy. Many of these – in particular later steps – are likely to be undertaken by a contractor commissioned to deliver this work, but you should expect to be actively involved in work to define the purpose, scope and opportunity of the work. Your Invitation to Tender (ITT) should set out a clear idea of the outputs required, and your contract management approach should plan for your team’s involvement in decisions relating to all of these steps.

Step 1: Define the purpose

Step 2: Define the scope and opportunity

Step 3: Identify the outputs required

Step 4: Identify who needs to be involved

Step 5: Choose a preferred method or approach

Step 1: Define the purpose

Establishing a clear purpose, and getting agreement on it across your team and from all parties in a decision-making role, is the single most important stage of planning any engagement process. It should set out clearly what can and what cannot be influenced.

Being able to make a clearly defined statement of your purpose at the outset of any engagement activity is vital for:

• ensuring a commonly shared understanding of the potential impact of the engagement i.e. what difference it can make
• enabling you to ensure that the right mechanisms are in place to transform the findings from your engagement into outcomes i.e. that there is a clear route for influence at an appropriate stage of the delivery cycle
• giving participants the opportunity to make an informed choice about getting involved i.e. a choice made on the basis of understanding the level of influence their participation can have and how their input will be used

Key questions to ask

What is the key purpose/s of our engagement?

What information / contribution is it that you specifically need from the engagement?

• what is the engagement process going to add to what you already know
• what tangible outputs do you want to have produced during and after the process
• what specific questions or problems you are inviting participants to address

How are you going to use this information?

What are the limits to public/stakeholder influence?

Fundamentally, can anything change as a result of participation? If not, you may want to consider whether engagement, beyond keeping people informed, is appropriate at all.

Step 2: Define the context and opportunity

Every engagement exercise takes place within a wider context:

• existing (and previous) decision making contexts, including party positions, UK wide policies and local policy drivers
• public awareness and history of engagement with the issues, including emotional and personal connections and relationships of trust between institutions
• practical constraints including budgets, timescales, resources etc

As part of the planning process it is important to define the interest, commitment and involvement of key decision-makers in the process and how the proposed engagement fits into the relevant decision-making systems.

Understanding the wider context is important to ensure that it:

• links with other relevant activities going on at the same time so that outputs can be shared or joined up
• does not duplicate other activities – one of the easiest ways to frustrate or alienate participants is to create a situation where they feel they are being asked to repeat their contributions
• is responsive to participant needs or sensitivities by appreciating their wider roles and commitments
• builds on previous experience and learns lessons from the past, particularly where relationships or trust may have become strained
• progresses quickly and is relevant to the needs of all parties

The earlier section on inclusive participation considers this from the perspective of equalities and inclusion.

Key questions to ask

Is this the right time in the delivery cycle to invest in initiating a participatory process?

Are decision makers supportive of your participation process and willing to give ‘conscientious consideration’ to the outputs? If not, you will need to consider how to gain their support. You might want to refer to the Basics of Participation section of this guidance.

Why might potential participants want to engage with you and what is their motivation for participating?

Have previous attempts at involving the public been successful? What have you already learned?

Is your process the only current attempt to initiate participation on this issue?

Are there opportunities to use the participation of the same target audience in addressing more than one topic?

Do you have enough resources, both time and money, to run the process?

You may want to consider, if time or resources are pressed, whether this is the right time in the delivery cycle to initiate participation, or whether a simpler approach could serve your needs at this point.

Step 3: Identify the outputs required

The outputs of an engagement exercise refer to the types of information that the process will deliver.

Determining the type of outputs you require will involve considering your overall purpose and the level of participation being used.

Identifying the type of outputs you are seeking at the early stage of planning for participation will help:

• ensure that you are able to choose the most useful approach – different participatory methods are designed to produce different types of outputs
• frame the questions you pose to participants
• identify who needs to be involved

Key questions to ask

What, specifically, should the engagement process achieve/deliver?

Is there shared agreement on the outputs required?

It may be useful to differentiate between ‘primary’ (essential) and ‘secondary’ ‘nice to have’ outputs, as this will help focus your choices relating to methods and participants

To assist you in making decisions about how to take forward engagement processes, a range of types of outputs are set out below:

Identification of issues and what they mean to different people. Engagement activities designed to deliver this type of output will involve opening up the issue to explore participant concerns and the implications different policy or delivery approaches may have.

New ideas in situations where policy or delivery challenges are persistent, or where the context may have changed (such as changed demographics in a neighbourhood, or a different regulatory environment) requiring engagement with people to generate new ideas for how to respond. Engagement activities designed to deliver this type of output will encourage creative problem solving and should only be undertaken when there is a genuine appetite and opportunity for innovation.

Specific decision on preferences i.e. verdicts where there are a clear and defined set of options to be considered.

Better understanding of the needs of service users to be better able to design, implement, or evaluate a policy, service, or programme.

Assessments of how services are currently being delivered to establish a greater understanding of the status quo in order to identify options for change e.g. an evaluation of a specific service or more widely, for example about the experience of single-parenthood or homelessness.

Overview of perspectives to better understand opinions and experiences around a topic in order to identify concerns, generate options, and develop solutions.

Recommendations for delivery using feedback from service users or other stakeholders on pre-existing or proposed options for how, when or where services are delivered.

Identifying priorities for improvement based on an overview of concerns or ideas about a topic that provides a clear indication of participants’ preferences (or the relative acceptability) of different options for improvement, including reasons why.

Step 4: Identify who needs to be involved

When initiating an engagement process it is important to recognise that ‘the public’ is not a useful answer when considering the target group for participation.

The type of participants who need to be involved must be informed by your purpose and the outputs required i.e. what is it specifically that these people can bring to the process. Achieving clarity on ‘who’ needs to be involved will also help determine the most appropriate method to use for your engagement activity.

Some points you may want to consider when thinking about who you want to participate in your engagement include:

• do participants need to agree with a specific objective or goal to be able to participate or is diversity of participant opinions important to your purpose?
• do participants need to have ‘lived experience’ of the issue, in order to add value to the process?
• should the process be open to anyone who wants to participate or should recruitment be targeted to those who have a specific characteristic or circumstance? Or does the nature of the issue under consideration mean that participants should be representative of the population?
• is it important to your outputs that participants bring ‘fresh eyes’ to the question or will it add more value if participants are already engaged with the issues?
• should those with professional or technical expertise be participating alongside members of the public on an equal footing or should the role of ‘experts’ in the process be different, for example to provide information?

It is important to ensure that a diverse range of participants (e.g. those on low-incomes, unemployed or underemployed, or with caring responsibilities) can participate and that the sampling and recruitment approach taken is appropriate to the range of people who need to be engaged with. There is further information on this in the inclusive participation section of this guidance.

Separate guidance is available on payment of expenses and compensating participants for their time.

Key questions to ask

Who do you need to hear from to deliver the outputs you are looking for?

Why would people choose to participate? What is in it for them?

What is the role you are asking them to play?

Are there any barriers to participation for your target group? If so what are these and how will you overcome them?

Consider structural and practical factors that may restrict a person’s ability to engage with your initiative. Directly ask participants or representative organisations what these barriers could be and what can be done to address them. Issues could include:

• timing of meetings (whether online or in person)
• length of time given to respond
• access to technology
• language requirements
• awareness / knowledge / interest in the issue

There is further information on this in the inclusive participation section of this guidance.

Step 5: Choose a preferred method or approach

This section lists alphabetically a range of common engagement methods that can be used to deliver specific types of outputs, and the types of participants you would typically involve in each method.

These methods are recognised across government and wider society, and have been developed to deliver specific types of outputs.

It is important to note that engagement methods are not fixed, and often the best results come from developing a bespoke approach to meet your specific needs. Following the steps in this guidance will help you clearly identify these needs.

There are a number of online resources, through which you can explore different forms of engagement:

• Participedia
• Open Policy Making Toolkit
• Civic Innovation Toolkit
• Involve’s Knowledge Bank
• Engage2020 Action Catalogue

Appreciative inquiry

Appreciative Inquiry works with a small core group of participants to explore what has worked well in the past to build a vision for the future. This small group builds outwards through friends/family/strangers into a much larger group, and could eventually involve hundreds of people.

Appreciative inquiry is conducive to collaboration at the visioning, development and evaluation stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• assessments of how services are currently being delivered
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of a topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Citizens’ Assemblies

A type of deliberative workshop that involves a relatively large body (50-250) of people, selected to be demographically representative of the general public coming together to deliberate on an issue. A Citizens’ Assembly will typically take place over several days, often spread out over weeks or months.

A means of involving participants at the visioning, development and/or appraisal stages of the delivery cycle. More rarely, it can be used as a tool for delegation at the decision-making stage.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• new ideas
• overview of perspectives / concerns
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• representative sample (i.e. mini-public)

Citizens’ juries

A type of deliberative workshop that involves a small group of people (12-24), representative of the demographics of a given population, who come together to deliberate on an issue over a period of 2-7 days (not necessarily consecutive).

A means of involving participants at the development and/or appraisal stages of the delivery cycle. More rarely, it can be used as a tool for delegation at the decision-making stage.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• specific decision i.e. verdict
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• representative sample (i.e. mini-public)

Citizen research

Citizen research identifies those most affected by a decision or policy, trains and supports them to lead on wider engagement with their peers, and brings evidence from that engagement back to government.

It is most conducive to involving and collaborating, especially at the visioning and appraisal stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• overview of perspectives / concerns
• priorities for improvement

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service / those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted (now or in the future)

Community-led action research

Taking a similar approach to citizen research, community-led action research is where the community decides on the issue to be researched, designs and carries out the research, and makes use of the results to achieve positive change. Help might be sought from academics, council officers or organisations with research expertise, but it is ultimately the community who decides what they want to find out, how they will do this and why.

This could be most conducive to involving and collaborating, especially at the visioning and appraisal stages of the delivery cycle. Its focus on action to produce change means that it could be well used at any stage of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• overview of perspectives / concerns
• priorities for improvement

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service / those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted (now or in the future)

Deliberative workshop

A form of facilitated group discussion that provides participants with the opportunity to learn about an issue, consider it in depth, understand and challenge each other’s opinions before reaching an informed conclusion.

Useful as a means of consulting, involving and collaborating, and can be used at all stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• assessments of how services are currently being delivered / current situation
• overview of perspectives / concerns
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• any group of participants, especially those with initially opposing views

Distributed dialogues

Decentralised conversation-based events at which stakeholders and other interested parties set up groups and events to discuss a topic agreed with the commissioning body, using an agreed format and background material.

Most conducive to consulting at the visioning, development, appraisal or evaluation stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• overview of perspectives or concerns

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Focus groups

A guided discussion with a small group (6-15) of people. They are normally one-off sessions (1-2 hours), though several may be run in different locations or with different groups on the same topic.

Effective as a means of consultation most often at the visioning and/or appraisal stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• assessments of how services are currently being delivered / current situation
• overview of perspectives / concerns
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• representative sample (i.e. mini-public)
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Multi-stakeholder steering groups

These are made up of stakeholders (professional, public and/or community representatives) who meet at key stages during the course of a project to oversee it and influence strategic decisions.

Conducive to participation at the involving and collaborating levels, and at all stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• new ideas
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• people with technical knowledge / specialists
• professional / public stakeholders
• existing users of a service / those with lived experience of the topic
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Online crowdsourcing

Crowdsourcing harnesses collaborative problem-solving and innovation through an open call for help and ideas, allowing any internet user to contribute via an online space, usually according to a loose guidance.

Online crowdsourcing is relevant to consulting and collaboration at the visioning and development stage of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• new ideas
• identification of issues

Participants typically involved:

• people with technical knowledge / specialists
• existing users of a service / those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue

Opinion polls

The polling of a representative sample to gather qualitative or quantitative data, in order to understand and quantify public opinion.

Opinion polls are useful for consulting at the visioning and / or appraisal stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• specific decisions
• overview of perspectives or concerns
• priorities for improvement
• recommendations for delivery
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• representative sample (i.e. mini-public)

Participatory budgeting

An umbrella term for mechanisms that delegate decision making power over public sector budgets and investment priorities to members of the public. In Scotland these practices are most often used to influence spending in local areas.

Participatory budgeting is useful for delegating at the decision-making stage of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver

• new ideas
• specific decision i.e. verdicts
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue or area

Participatory strategic planning

A consensus-building approach that helps a community come together through workshops of 20-50 people. Public and expert stakeholders work together to agree how they would like their community or organisation to develop.

Relevant to involving and collaborating at the development and appraisal stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• specific decision i.e. verdicts
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals

Participants typically involved:

• people with technical knowledge, specialists
• professional and public stakeholders
• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Pop-up democracy

The use of temporary, site-specific installations / or exhibitions that invite unplanned participation. These types of opportunities are often held in busy public places e.g. supermarkets, high streets and local community events and offer passers by the chance to learn about an issue or proposal and leave comments.

Most useful as a means of informing or consultation at the visioning and/or

development stages of the delivery cycle. Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• overview of perspectives, concerns
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals – preferences or acceptability

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

Public or ‘town hall’ meetings

Members of a community come together to discuss issues and concerns with a public official, government representative or decision-maker. Typically operates as a question and answer session and will not usually provide space for in-depth discussion or engagement with participants.

Town hall meetings are most conducive to informing and can be utilised at all stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• overview of perspectives / concerns

Participants typically involved:

• professional and public stakeholders
• people with a particular interest in the issue

Qualitative interviews

An established form of research in which participants are taken through interview questions designed to explore a topic or issue in depth. Participants are given space to expand their answers and accounts of their experiences and feelings – the goal is to understand the motivations and reasoning behind any concerns and opinions they hold.

Qualitative interviews are an established means of consulting at the visioning, development, and evaluation stages of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• assessments of how services are currently being delivered
• overview of perspectives, concerns

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future
• professional and public stakeholders

Stakeholder roundtables

Roundtable discussions are small group discussions (generally 10-15 people) where everybody has an equal right to participate. Participants are invited by the organisers to take part because they are recognised as having a ‘stake’ in the question or issue to be discussed.

Stakeholder roundtables are suitable for involving and, potentially, collaborating at the development, appraisal and evaluation phases of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• overview of perspectives or concerns
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement

Participants typically involved:

• people with technical knowledge, specialists
• professional / public stakeholders
• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue

Traditional written consultation

An established practice within government and, in some limited situations, the required approach to engagement. Typically written consultation will be underpinned by a written consultation paper. This provides information on the topic and sets out questions for response.

Consultation papers are published online. Stakeholders and members of the public are invited to respond via Citizen Space, the Scottish Government’s Consultation platform. A traditional written consultation is open to anyone who chooses to respond.

A means of consulting that is most useful at the appraisal stage of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• better understanding of the needs of service users
• overview of perspectives or concerns
• assessment of proposals

Participants typically involved:

• people with technical knowledge, specialists
• professional and public stakeholders
• people with a particular interest in the issue

User panels

A regular meeting of service users about the quality, management and/or direction of a public service.

User panels are relevant to involving and at times collaborating at the development, appraisal and implementation stages of the delivery cycle. They can also be used to evaluate a service.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• better understanding of the needs of service users
• assessments of how services are currently being delivered / current situation
• recommendations for delivery
• priorities for improvement
• assessment of proposals

Participants typically involved:

• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future

World café

An engagement method that makes use of an informal café setting in which participants explore an issue by discussing it in small groups over multiple rounds. It is a method characterised by a strong underpinning philosophy that wisdom comes from people engaging in ‘conversations that matter’.

It is most conducive to consulting (gathering public feedback) and involving (incorporating concerns and aspirations) in the development stage of the delivery cycle.

Outputs method is designed to deliver:

• identification of issues
• new ideas
• overview of perspectives or concerns

Participants typically Involved:

• professional and public stakeholders
• existing users of a service, those with lived experience of the topic
• people with a particular interest in the issue
• those likely to be most impacted, now or in the future