Engagement is all the rage ... at least in theory

The push towards a new politics of greater citizen engagement and volunteering get a strong nudge from Sophia Parker in the current edition of the RSA journal. She notes that politicians are increasingly arguing that our social wellbeing cannot be delivered solely from the centre:

We, the people, are all the rage. In a passionate speech to the NCVO, Gordon Brown argued that “it is people who are engaged in changing the world that will be the next momentum for change”. But it’s not just Brown who is trailing this agenda. The day after Brown promised a series of citizens’ juries to open up policy processes, David Cameron launched a proposal for a ‘national citizen service’ for young people, to help them “feel that British society is something they want to be part of".

Sophia offers an historical perspective on the current enthusiasm for more bottom-up action, from Beveridge to Blair, through Margaret Thatcher's declaration: “There is no such thing as society…too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it’s the government’s job to cope with it.”
We started with a post-war 1940s belief in the State, moved through the consumerist look-out-for-yourself phase, into a world of top-down performance targets for public services mixed with requirements on agencies to engage, consult and empower. It's now time to work out what can be "delivered" and what depends on people's involvement for lasting solutions and wellbeing. As Sophia points out:

Whether it’s managing long-term conditions, living sustainably or tackling gun crime — all issues dominating the press recently — these are not things that can be delivered to passive citizens by formal services alone. Their ‘solution’ relies as much on how we as individuals behave, and how we interact with the world around us, as it does on how the government responds. In other words, this new-found interest in the role of citizens in change is not only ideologically led, but deeply pragmatic too.

The journal article is in support of the vision of  RSA chief executive Matthew Taylor for an  organisation where the 27,000 members - called Fellows - develop a network for civic innovation. Sophia, who has previously worked at Demos, is now busy on the programme to engage Fellows, focussed initially around an event on November 22. Previous posts on that indexed here.
Fortunately for those interested in the "how to" of engagement, my friends over at Involve have just launched a very splendid new web site People and participation.net. It has been designed by social media specialists Headshift, with funding from a couple of Government departments, and includes an interactive tool which helps you select appropriate participatory methods depending on your circumstances. That's a bit like the Dialogue Designer I wrote about here. As well as a database of methods, case studies and resources, there's a section where you can post a question to Involve experts and so get specialist advice.
The site was launched by Communities Secretary Hazel Blears as part of the Government's 'Empowerment Action Plan', which Involve says:

... sets out how the Government will deliver on its commitment to empower communities through a range of activities, including more community power to trigger petitions, citizens' juries and an increased say for local communities over local budgets....

A few years back I would have been whooping for joy at all this official support for public and community engagement ... and I do believe it is essential whether within membership organisations like the RSA, or programmes for community regeneration. And yes, it is brilliant that Involve has pulled together so much excellent advice.
My reservation is that it's one thing to talk about engagement, and an entirely different matter to make it work ... because change depends not just on methods but on attitudes. I rambled on about that here and here, arguing that not only do power-holding organisation have to be prepared to listen and deliver their side, they have to start early in the process of engagement. They need to open up, form new relationships, and work things out with key interests from the start. Engagement doesn't work unless it is collaborative. I hope Involve are already working on a sister site: organanisationsandparticipation.net ... and that the RSA will prove a good case study.

Technorati Tags: engagement, rsa

Comments

[Laura Whitehead]

Great article David, lots of food for thought. Great also that govt is understanding the roles of participation.

My only one reservation to their agenda, that real participation comes from a grass roots upward way. Meaningful participation is always less successful when structured or decided it needs to take place from the top down. Think how charities often start, because like-minded people saw a need, not because a government contract/agreement decided the cause was needed! I have seen this in reality with some of the Government targets and 'contracts' re volunteering and participation for example, down here where I am based.
As you also mention take up and sign up takes a long time when derived from a top down approach rather than a needs led grass roots approach!

Let's hope that the RSA can be an exemplary case study one day soon - That would be encouraging to see.
Thanks for another thoughtful posting!
Laura

[Tessy Britton]

The biggest challenge is to keep expectations at reasonable levels...as in the short term only those who want to be engaged will be.

But as this moves from the 'early adopter' arena towards the much greater majority, I am sure it will prove to be extaordinary and wonderful :)

[David Wilcox]

Laura, Tessy - thanks. Any ideas on how any body promoting participation (whether RSA or public agency) can best best help develop the climate for involvement? Personally I think this is about small ways of reaching out, not just set-piece workshop etc

[Tim Davies]

Hello David et al.

Having spent much of today working on an updated version of Hear by Right - probably /the/ standards framework for organisations in England seeking to involve young people in participative ways - it struck me that I've not seen a more general purpose equivelent for Adults, and that, in fact, such a framework would be really useful.

The learning behind Hear by Right is that engagement has to be built in, not bolted on, and that involves some pretty big changes across an organisation. Some aspects of Hear by Right are specific to young people (e.g. asking organisations to endorse the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child) - but most of its 49 indicators (based around 7 standards) could apply to any organisation seeking to create deep levels of stakeholder engagement.

A sneek preview of the new Hear by Right site (hopefully released properly next month) where you can browse the standards here: http://hbr.obshost.co.uk/standards

It's worth noting - organisations that started using Hear by Right in its first version around 2003 still often find themselves at the 'emerging' level of embedding young people's participation in decision making. Not that they've failed to make progress - but that the journey of creating organisations that are truly participative, that change their power structures, and that empower stakeholders to influence change - is a very long and very tricky one.

It doesn't only involve a diverse range of projects... but involves getting systems, structures, policies and staffing right, and involves the whole organisation, not just the people who run the engagement events.