Consultation
Be ruthless in summarising and synthesising
The various environmental scanning exercises and consultation activities are likely to generate a large amount of material, references, comments, and opinions. Skill is needed to précis and re-present these
Andrew West, Director of Student Services, The University of Sheffield
Senior managers often and rightly take the lead role in formalising the text of documents as high-level, strategic and important as mission, vision and value statements. In some circumstances it may even be formally decreed who has the authority to define such things, as is the case in many FE colleges where the Corporation is responsible for agreeing the mission statement. But regardless of where the final responsibility lies there will be few institutions who do not consult with staff, students and other stakeholders during this process. Taking creative and active steps to engage with stakeholders through a variety of means not only increases the likely relevance and quality of the 'end product' but also starts the process of encouraging ownership and active engagement within the concepts the statements define.
There is no one right way to undertake this process of consultation and engagement and, indeed, there are significant advantages to employing several parallel approaches, each designed to achieve a specific goal or to engage with a particular target audience. It will also depend on how far down the road of engagement and consultation you wish to travel. Some institutions may wish to only seek wider opinion once a range of options have already been shortlisted, whilst others may see merit in proactively engaging stakeholders at a much earlier stage when ideas are still being formed.
Table 1. Possible approaches to consultation
Technique |
Pros |
Cons |
Hints, tips and exemplars |
Briefing documents (online or printed) |
Cheap Wide reach opportunity for ideas/proposals to be expressed in a considered, uninterrupted manner |
Difficult to measure impact 'One way', no opportunity to engage in dialogue |
The example from the University of Leeds demonstrates an excellent use of online resources, including video clips, and provides information at varying levels to accommodate the casual browser and those interested in the detail |
Management blogs |
Very cheap Informal Opportunity to raise awareness of the constraints and problems faced by management which may influence the process Helps 'humanise' the process of management Feedback can be captured (and moderated) via blog comments |
Requires an ongoing commitment A careful line must be trod between informality and openness and necessary management discretion |
|
'Road shows' and drop in sessions (i.e. informal exhibitions and information points which can located at popular congregation points to distribute information and promotional literature and to answer questions |
May reach those reluctant to participate in more formal events Informal atmosphere encourages honest reaction and debate Distribution of promotional 'freebies' helps raise awareness Able to target particular areas where it is felt that awareness is low or resistance high |
Resource intensive Difficult to capture/analyse feedback |
Locations in or near refectories, cafes, libraries and campus shops often make good locations ensuring a high 'foot fall' Providing free food and drink (coffee and muffins etc) will usually attract people Providing a comments and suggestions box (or electronic equivalent) will enable some outputs to be captured |
Team/ faculty / department briefings |
Provides opportunity for discussion to be tailored for specific operational areas Encourages groups to interpret the proposals and think about them in an applied, as opposed to abstract, way Starts the process of local planning in response to agreed proposals |
Outputs (flip charts, whiteboards etc) difficult to capture |
Electronic keypads/voting systems can help capture preferences (though less useful at capturing new ideas/suggestions) Use digital cameras to capture comments made on whiteboards Consider who should facilitate the briefing: a member of the senior management team or, perhaps, an external, independent facilitator with specific expertise in this area |
Focus groups |
Ability to choose participants enables you to ensure a useful cross-representation of stakeholders Provides the opportunity to engage with a broader group of stakeholders by including governors, research partners, local residents etc Members of the focus groups can act as 'champions' within their local areas |
Requires focus group members to devote time to the process Difficult to enforce attendance so may only end up with those already favourable to the process How many groups/members are required for the group to be representative? Getting people together may be difficult in split location institutions |
Don't shy away from inviting some known opponents or critics of the process onto the focus groups. Having the opportunity to air their grievances and to be actively engaged with the process may just encourage them to see it in a fairer light Again consider whether external expertise in group facilitation is required |
Electronic discussion areas (e.g. wikis, VLEs etc) |
Provides an opportunity for all stakeholders (staff, students and beyond) to proactively contribute ideas and suggestions at an early formative stage of the process, rather than simply reacting to predefined suggestions Shared nature of the tool means suggestions made are likely to stimulate further comment and suggestions Outputs easy to manipulate and analyse Location independent |
Use of technology (particularly new technology) may alienate some staff from the process Active participation may lead to false expectation that all suggestions will be incorporated leading to disappointment and frustration |
Determine in advance how the discussion forum will be managed (how will you check for and react to inappropriate/offensive comments etc) Using existing tools (e.g. your VLE) may encourage participation - providing it delivers the required functionality Because of their nature, there are few publicly accessible examples of wikis that we can point you to. Although the wiki itself isn't accessible, it is clear to see how Bristol University is using a wiki to encourage debate about possible IT futures and the University's strategic direction A simple explanation of how wikis work and why they are useful is available from YouTube |
Voting / survey systems |
Makes it easy to obtain the views of large numbers of people The data is easily captured and analysed Can either be used independently via the intranet or as part of workshop, briefing or other event Ease of use encourages high levels of participation |
Use of technology may alienate some staff Only suitable for seeking opinion on existing proposals, rather than encouraging new ones |
Think carefully about question structure to ensure that useful, comparable data will be returned Consider the balance which must be struck between comprehensiveness (to ensure you obtain all the information you require) and brevity (to increase the level of response) |
Our Guide to Social Software has further information on the various technical solutions now available and their possible application within an FE/HE institution
Innovative and creative use of a range of such techniques makes it possible to move towards engaging in a true 'strategic conversation' within the institution. By encouraging people to think about and debate what the institution's mission, vision and core values really are the institution will have generated genuine momentum behind the process and encouraged real institutional ownership, rather than staff just viewing them as a set of meaningless words which suddenly appear on the website.
Analysis and feedback
Of course it is one thing to encourage and receive contributions from stakeholders via any or all of the approaches listed, but quite another to then manipulate, analyse and reflect upon the data obtained. The scale of this task should not be underestimated and may well take a range of staff and associated skills: technical, statistical, operational, managerial and presentational.
As well as aggregating and synthesising data for the consideration of those ultimately responsible for agreeing these strategic statements it is also worth considering the benefits of providing timely and ongoing feedback to those who have contributed to the process - and those that haven't. Providing regular updates, summaries of feedback received to date and management responses to what has been said all helps to demonstrate that a two-way consultation process is genuinely underway and that people's views are being listened to, if not always acted upon. Without such feedback loops people might start to doubt progress and question whether their continued participation and interest is justified.
