Scope checklist
1. Can anything change as a result of participation?
If nothing can change as a result of participation it is often better to rely on traditional communication methods. The experience of taking part in a process without any potential impact is often frustrating and can damage the image of the sponsoring organisation. It is very important to be open about what is up for grabs through participation and which decisions are already made so that potential participants can make an informed decision whether or not they want to take part.
2. Do you have at least three months to set up and run the process?
While it is sometimes possible to set up and run good participation processes in a very short period of time this is very challenging and should be avoided. Short time scales can make it difficult to recruit the participants and leave less time for planning and adaptation to local circumstances.
3. Do you have enough resources (both people and money) for your intended process?
There are many examples of where insufficient resources have led to bad practice. Involving the public can be surprisingly time-consuming and staff need to be properly supported and trained. If the allocated budget is insufficient to run a suitable participation process it is often better to opt for a less ambitious option rather than risk failure.
4. Is the decision maker/problem holder supportive of wider participation?
It is challenging to run a participation process when those who hold the power are unwilling to listen. Many participants may choose not to get involved in a process with very slim chances of making an impact and it is important not to give participants false hopes about potential what impact. In cases where decision makers are unsupportive of participation a more traditional approach may be more appropriate.
5. Is the issue one which is of interest to your intended participants?
Often the agenda for participatory events are set solely based on the interests of the sponsoring organisation. If you don't consider what your potential participants might get out of the process you risk failure.
6. Have previous attempts at involving the public (if any) been successful?
The fact that previous participation processes have failed should not deter you from trying. However, you should learn as much as you can about the reasons why the previous processes failed and you might need to reconsider your approach. It is also worth keeping in mind that past failures often breed apathy, cynicism and outright hostility amongst your intended participants.
7. Is your process the only attempt to involve these participants around this issue?
The number of engagement processes has increased markedly over the past decade. Unfortunately many participation processes duplicate each other, either in terms of what they are trying to engage around or whom they are trying to reach. By joining forces with other organisations that are also trying to engage with the same groups that you can make better use of both your resources and the time of your participants.
Return to Scope Introduction