‘Community consultation’…are consultants always right?

The PWF article How DO adults learn…to tackle Coles/Woolies?? has racked up a lot of ‘page views’ and a reader has sent us the following story about a council consultant which really makes you wonder HOW we should go about ‘engaging’ community members. Can ticking a prescribed set of boxes – ie following a council brief – really establish what’s going on in a community?

Obviously councils are responsible for the efficient management of ratepayers’ assets. Employing management consultants to assess this is fine and ‘accountable’ …BUT… who writes the brief? And, if the brief is lacking in, for example, what’s needed to ‘engage’ the community, whose responsibility is it tom address this situation?

The incident in a nutshell

This council brief required a consultant to assess ‘best practice’ with regard to different management models and actual community management of a council/ratepayers’ owned building. Several quite reasonable observations and subsequent recommendations were made to council. These were then presented to the community committee that ‘oversees’ the building management. Most of the committee had not had any discussion with the consultant.

It seems the brief was followed but without much insight into the way communities operate. The only people consulted were those directly involved on a physical day-to-day
basis and the grassroots ratepayers’ perspective was not considered – probably on the basis that all this would take too long and ‘they’ probably wouldn’t be interested anyway. Fair enough, BUT, this meant that the actual situation did not emerge through the prescribed process.

The actual situation

Many community groups are interested in using space in this building for various purposes but a comprehensive booking schedule is not readily available.

• The wider community has no idea about the management process and what ratepayers’ entitlements are and how they can make suggestions as to a more equitable management process.
• The consultant has made recommendations to council based on a process that has excluded a large number of the ratepaying owners of the building, who MAY have a position that should be considered.

Another approach

Let’s acknowledge the ‘them and us’ attitude that often/usually exists between ratepayers and local councils – often regarded as ‘the ones who collect the garbage’. Personally I believe contemporary councils have a fairly enlightened approach but I don’t think I am strongly supported!

I believe it’s possible to soften this entrenched attitude by taking time to ‘engage’. Working meaningfully with communities DOES take time and needs to operate from a basis of trust. Let’s take a few hours over maybe a few months for a council officer to:

• talk to local people/groups, and get some info dispersed through local group newsletters
• get some articles in the local newspaper
• set up a listening point/info table at a local gathering spot eg Saturday morning outside the supermarket
• talk to the local schools/sporting groups and get the students involved perhaps in a related project – important to learn about civic duties and practices.

A community-based result

Over this period – similar to a policy formulation period within council itself – it is likely the community will see that the council is genuinely wanting grassroots feedback. Feedback might already be available through letters to the editor, phone calls to local councillors etc. If none is forthcoming people may be happy to let council deal with the issue itself.

Working from a base of solid info-percolation a consultant can act as a steward/sounding board to guide community thinking with a chance of general agreement, as most will see where the middle ground lies and that favourite hobby horses may not have the numbers!

Another thing…

Elements of successful community-based collaboration

According to Jamal & Getz in ‘Collaboration Theory & Community Tourism Planning’

• Everyone involved must recognise that one group on its own is unlikely to succeed in a community-based project – the interdependence of groups in a community is a fact of life.
• ALL key people must be involved right from the start.
• Everyone involved must be able to see personal benefits as well as benefits for others.
• The leader/leadership group must be seen to have the authority and resources to successfully complete the project.
• The collaborative process (coming from the inclusion of ALL key people) itself must be seen as having the power to influence decisions made eg by council or government.
• The community’s goals for the collaborative project must be clearly stated and monitored by a reference group that helps with ongoing reviews and adjustment.