I’ve previously written about the importance of expectation management as an essential piece to successful public participation.
With Zilino, our goal is to support the project organizers in managing participants’ expectations from beginning to end. Specifically, we want conveners and facilitators to be very transparent about the level of influence participants can reasonably expect to have on the decision making process.
As part of setting up a new project, we will ask the organizers to complete a questionnaire that covers the basic project parameters (objective, scope, timeline etc.). This information will be prominently exposed to all participants at the beginning of a consultation in an effort to set the right expectations from the get-go.
We’re still shuffling things around at this point, but here’s a list of items we’re considering (in no particular order):
Project basics
- Project name
- Project description
- Project start and (estimated) end date
- Major project phases and deliverables
- Estimated group size
- Where does this project fit on the overall timeline and how does it tie into past, present or future activities? (e.g. previous decisions, face-to-face events)
Convener profile
- Who is the convener of this consultation?
- Who is funding this project?
- Who will participate on behalf of the convener?
Participant profile
- Who is invited to participate?
- How are participants selected?
- What is your outreach plan?
- How are participants expected to contribute?
- Will participation be reimbursed/rewarded?
- What are the ground rules for participation?
Impact
- Is this consultation tied to a decision making process?
- What is the ultimate decision at stake?
- Who is in charge of making that decision?
- When will the decision be made?
- What is the scope and expected outcome of this consultation?
- What impact will this consultation have on the decision making process? (this is the “promise to the public” as per IAP2’s Spectrum of Public Participation)
- How do you define project success? (key success factors)
Follow-up
- What will happen next once the consultation is over?
- What will happen to the content generated by participants?
Risks
- What are the risks that the consultation might fail to have the intended impact?
- How are these risks being addressed?
We think that briefing the participants in a comprehensive manner will significantly reduce the risk of unrealistic expectations and the disappointment and frustration they cause.
Leave a comment if you can think of other factors that participants should be made aware of before they join a consultation.
Related posts:
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Here’s a nice example I found recently:
http://www.ngopulse.org/group/africanagenda2010/faqs
Their FAQ answers the following questions:
Why this consultation?
Who is driving this consultation?
Why an e-consultation?
Who should participate in the #AfricanAgenda2010 e-consultation?
What is the timeline?
Will I receive feedback?
Can I comment on the results?
How can I help?
Another good example: http://www.napaclimatedialogue.org/about_the_dialogue
And another one: http://de-en.gc.ca/frequently-asked-questions/
Weekend post, hope you like it: “In Search for the Perfect Participant Briefing” — http://bit.ly/bd3UiK #edem #opengov
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
Here’s one aspect of how we plan to facilitate good expectation management on Zilino: http://bit.ly/cR4nmR #edem
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
[Global] Intellitics, Inc. » In Search of the Perfect Participant Briefing: I’ve previously written about the impo… http://bit.ly/daPdBX
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
{ 3 trackbacks }