Ethics in engagement is vital. We need ethics to keep the process open, honest, inclusive, far-reaching, respectful, fair, collaborative, and informative. Without ethics, people lose faith in the engagement process, they don’t trust it, they feel used, marginalised, unheard and irrelevant.
There are times in most projects when participants can simply be tired. This can sometimes be referred to as a cycle of negativity.
“…This session is part of what will be ongoing engagement with industry and the community about the project. We want to involve the industry and community in the project. But this isn’t some all empowering engagement thing…”
Knowing when to engage can make the difference between getting a great turnout of people who wish to engage and getting a big turnout of people who are angry at the lack of time they have to participate in the process!
In both engagement and communications the word sorry is one that is greatly under utilised.
We have been fortunate of late to be involved in some exciting projects to help shape government policy.
In recent times we have noticed that there has been strong support from organisations that are investing in their engagement processes to develop engagement frameworks.
It seems to me that outrage, confected or otherwise is being seen as a completely legitimate tool in public discourse.
Have you ever been the victim of workplace bullying? What exactly is workplace bullying anyway and how would you know if you have suffered from it?
In IAP2 and community engagement land there is a great saying that goes along the lines of; if you’re not at the dinner table you might be on the menu.
Over the past few months of IAP2 training there have been some very interesting discussions about community versus stakeholder engagement.c