Non-APS Theme 5: There some universal basics that help make an engagement effective and genuine. Participants made useful suggestions on how to get them right. Insights: Some features of effective and genuine engagements were reported by so many participants that they are probably universal. Some are above and included: listening more than talking; closing the loop; not asking the same questions already asked in previous engagements; allowing enough time to respond; avoiding engagements during busy periods like Christmas, New Year and Easter; and being transparent about the aims and stages of the process. Many clearly valued face to face interactions, noting these made them feel listened to. Participants made specific suggestions on how to improve on current engagements, including creating incentives for APS staff to engage the public; undertaking engagement in ‘real time’ and not waiting for set pieces (like formal issues papers and roundtables) for feedback; and adding requirements to engage into SES staff contracts. Drawing on their own expertise and good experiences engaging with government, they made numerous suggestions to make engagement more genuine and effective. Many stressed the importance of using simple language, engaging early, and working on ‘soft skills’. Participants urged the APS to be more open. This included being up front about what they are doing; where information will go once it is collected; and for the APS to define value in working together on both sides. After a consultation is over, some wanted government to release the data and information they relied on to reach a decision. Perceptions also matter. Most of the participants were adamant that the APS actually needs to deliver rather than just be seen to be delivering. Implications: Getting the basics is crucial to build trust. Simple things like improved customer service, up to standards provided by big companies, would go a long way. This includes being more reciprocal with the public, and talking like normal people with ordinary and everyday language. Personas of typical public participation users in the APS and the public To further empathy, we segmented our users into personas. Personas are a design tool used in many professions as ‘hypothetical archetypes of actual users’. In our project, they are a composite of real users who we interviewed. They summarise their most relevant characteristics in respect of public participation. They show that different users will require different and tailored strategies to encourage better public participation.
Brenton Holmes ‘Citizens' engagement in policymaking and the design of public services’, Australian Parliamentary Library, 2011. Cameron Shorter ‘Making GovHack (and open government) more impactful’, The Mandarin, 2017. Carolyn Hendriks ‘Participatory and collaborative governance,’ chapter 17 in ‘Contemporary politics in Australia: Theories, practices and issues’, Cambridge Press, 2012. Carolyn Hendriks ‘Policy evaluation and public participation’, chapter in ‘Routledge Handbook of Public Policy,’ Routledge, 2013. Carolyn Hendriks ‘Conscious Coupling: Linking Citizens and Elites in Policy Deliberations’, Melbourne University School of Government, 2015. Celeste Young ‘Citizen’s juries: panacea for policy ‘ills’ transforming government?’, Victoria Institute of Strategic Economic Studies and Bang the Table, 2017. Clara Jamart ‘Sharing Power : How might participatory democracy be privileged?’, Agter, 2010. Crispin Butteris ‘What is community engagement, exactly?’, Bang the 2016. Crispin Butteris, ‘Quality versus quantity in online participation’, Bang the Table, 2012. David Donaldson ‘Parkinson: implementation is harder than policy, don’t undervalue it’, The Mandarin, 2016. Link: Marr ‘The White Queen’, Quarterly Essay, 2017. Delib ‘‘Digital democracy in practice’ – seminar/Q&A with Exeter University students’, Delib, 2017. Don Lenihan ‘An Ontario Public Engagement Framework: Report of the Open Dialogue Initiative’, 2016. Don Lenihan ‘Building a strategic design capacity with community - a report on the DHS Co-Design Community Engagement Prototype’, Department of Services/Canada’s Public Policy Forum, 2012. Don Lenihan, Canada’s Public Policy Forum ‘A Case Study of Ontario’s Condominium Act Review’, Canada’s Public Policy Forum, 2014. Don Lenihan ‘Is ‘Open Dialogue’ the Answer to ‘Post-fact’ populism?’, Canada 20/20, 2017. Don Lenihan ‘Rescuing policy: The case for public engagement’, Public Policy Forum, Canada, 2012. Don Lenihan, Tom Pitfield ‘How big data is about to explode policymaking as we know it: The rise of civil analytics’, Canada2020, 2017.
E. Lind, Christiane Arndt ‘Perceived fairness and regulatory policy: A behavioural science perspective on government-citizen interactions’, OECD Regulatory Policy Working Papers, OECD, 2016. Gabrielle Chan ‘Trump-style political disaffection taking hold in Australia, review says’, The Guardian, 2017. Original survey data the article draws on is here: http://australianelectionstudy.org/. Geoffrey Moore ‘Crossing the chasm’, Harper Business Essentials, 1991. Gordon de Brouwer ‘Secretary Valedictory’, speech delivered at Institute of Public Administration Australia, ACT Division, 2017. Government of Ontario ‘Public Engagement’, last accessed August 2017. Link: https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-engagement. Heather Smith ‘Speech to the Institute of Public Administration Australia’, Institute of Public Administration Australia, 2016. Hélène Landemore ‘We, All of the People – Five lessons from Iceland’s failed experiment in creating a crowdsourced constitution’, Slate, 2014. Henry Farrell ‘The Obama administration wanted to open up government to citizen input. Why hasn’t it worked?’ Washington Post, 2016. IAP2 Canada ‘IAP2 Spectrum review - Summary of engagement process’, IAP2, 2017. Jacqueline Street, Katherine Duszynski, Stephanie Krawczyka, Annette Braunack-Mayer ‘The Use of Citizen’s Juries in Health Policy Decision making: A systemic review’, Social Science and Medicine, 2014. Nielsen ‘The 90-9-1 Rule for Participation Inequality in Social Media and Online Communities’, Nielsen Norman Group, 2006. Jay Weatherill ‘Governments Have Lost the Art of Involving the People’, South Australian Government, 2015. Link: Jenny Stewart ‘Dilemmas of engagement’, Australian National University, 2009. Jill Rutter ‘Opening up policymaking’, Institute for Government, UK, 2012. John Daley ‘Presentation: Trends in Australian industry’, Grattan Institute, 2017. John May ‘Why the 90-9-1 rule works: inequality and community engagement’, Bang the Table, 2016. Jonathan West, Tom Bentley ‘Time for a new consensus’, Griffith Review, 2016. Julie Simon, Theo Bass, Victoria Boelman, Geoff Mulgan ‘Digital democracy: The tools transforming political engagement’, Nesta, 2017.