Non-APS Theme 5: Insights: Some features of effective and genuine engagements were There some reported by so many participants that they are probably universal. Some are above and included: listening more universal basics than talking; closing the loop; not asking the same that help make an questions already asked in previous engagements; allowing enough time to respond; avoiding engagements during busy engagement periods like Christmas, New Year and Easter; and being effective and transparent about the aims and stages of the process. Many clearly valued face to face interactions, noting these made genuine. them feel listened to. Participants made Participants made specific suggestions on how to improve useful suggestions on current engagements, including creating incentives for APS staff to engage the public; undertaking engagement in on how to get time’ and not waiting for set pieces (like formal issues ‘real them right. 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 skills’. ‘soft 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 archetypes of actual users’. In ‘hypothetical 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.
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.
open_government_partnership-committment_5.2-discover-report.docx