Some reflections on, and tips about, deliberative engagement processes

There’s a growing community of practitioners out there talking, thinking and experimenting with deliberative engagement processes. I happen to be one of them, and I’ve just facilitated my 80^th deliberative process.

My first was back in 1998, which I presented on at an IAP2 Conference in Banff the following year, sharing a session with the CEO of the Jefferson Center. Then there was a bit of a gap – three years before the next one (a Citizens’ Jury on the Sydney Airport Masterplan), then another three-year stretch. But over the past decade interest in deliberative processes has grown enormously. There’s increasing recognition of the value these processes bring, including legislative changes in Victoria requiring local government to use deliberative engagement to inform their Council Plan, Asset Management Plan, Finance Plan and Health and Well-being Plan.

So, before getting to my reflections, here is an explanation of what deliberative engagement processes are.

A Deliberative Engagement Process (DEP) is a structured way of involving the public that brings together a representative group of citizens, usually randomly selected, to tackle complex issues through informed discussion and collective reasoning. They are designed to go well beyond opinion polling or conventional community consultation, providing space for deeper, evidence-based deliberation. Crucially, decision-makers commit to responding publicly to the panel’s recommendations and explaining how they’ve been considered or acted upon.

The key difference from traditional community consultation is the emphasis on learning and reasoning together, rather than people just expressing what they already think. Participants are expected to engage seriously with evidence, listen to others, and be genuinely open to changing their minds based on what they learn.

Eight reflections from the field

After 80 processes, here are some of my reflections.

1. They deliver the goods. DEPs have consistently shown they enable a broad cross-section of the community to weigh up evidence on complex issues and provide genuinely helpful, wise advice to decision-makers.
2. Experts are impressed. Subject matter experts regularly comment on the quality of questions they get from deliberative panels. They feel their experience and expertise is genuinely appreciated by participants – which isn’t always the case in other forums.
3. Don’t underestimate people. Those same experts also consistently report they underestimated how well citizens can get their heads around complex issues, and their willingness to examine their own assumptions
4. They often have real influence. DEPs have been quite influential in practice. Even when some recommendations aren’t adopted (and panels often provide multiple recommendations), generally the majority do get taken up.
5. It’s transformative for participants. I have so many stories here. Some participants have become so interested in particular issues they’ve gone to university to study them further. Others have pursued careers in politics. Many have formed lasting friendships and new support networks through the process.
6. However, they’re not a silver bullet. DEPs are no substitute for broader engagement – in fact, they’re often helped and informed by earlier, wider consultation processes.
7. Poor planning kills confidence. When individuals or groups feel excluded from the process and have no other way to contribute their views, it can seriously undermine confidence in the whole exercise. Also, if the process is not balanced it can generate mistrust, and give weight to accusations of the process being designed in such a way as to ‘socially engineer’ a particular outcome.
8. Not right for everything. Deliberative engagement isn’t necessarily superior to other forms of engagement for all issues. Getting feedback on a draft plan with numerous elements probably isn’t well suited – you can’t be ‘deeply deliberative’ over a report covering multiple actions, and there’s often reluctance from decision-makers to revisit something they consider 95% done. It isn’t co-design either. Generally, deliberation is about weighing up various options rather than designing a new solution. Co-design will always involve deliberation; whereas deliberative processes don’t usually involve co-design.

Ten tips for robust deliberative processes
If you want to ensure your deliberative process is sufficiently robust, here are some tips.

1. Get the questions right. Give plenty of time and thought to the questions you’re putting to the panel – the ‘remit’. It helps if:
   • It’s something the panel can reasonably influence (decision-makers believe the recommendations will help them make good decisions)
   • The issue is substantial enough to be worth everyone’s effort
2. There’s useful information from several sources to actually enable deliberation (you can have a great question without useful information, which means people can only offer sentiment rather than informed judgment)
3. Engage decision-makers early. Ask key executives and decision-makers upfront how they believe a panel can help them. This shapes the questions and gives everyone confidence the recommendations will be properly considered.
4. Think about timing. Consider whether your process could be impacted or undermined by the timing of elections or other competing events that might reduce participation.
5. Pay a reasonable incentive and use independent recruitment. This helps achieve a better cross-section of the community and protects against criticism that people have been hand-picked for a particular result.
6. Brief your presenters well. Make sure the information they’re providing can be easily understood and is focused on what the panel needs to hear to do their job – not everything they know about the topic.
7. Allow thinking time. Build in sufficient time for deliberation throughout the process. My rule of thumb is to allow the same amount of time for deliberation as for presentations. Avoid consecutive presentations – people need time to process information and consider how it relates to the remit.
8. Check in regularly. Throughout the process, find out what panel members are learning, finding interesting, or being challenged about. The more everyone learns, the better the deliberation.
9. Share the story. Find ways to share the process with the broader community. One of the best approaches is interviewing panel members about their experience on camera and posting to social media or your website. This builds more confidence than organizational communications or even the CEO talking about the process.
10. Environment matters. A venue with natural light is a bonus, and access to fresh air makes a real difference. Feed people well. Great coffee is a bonus too.

There are plenty more tips, but that’s enough for now. I’m sure others reading this have their own insights to share. If you have questions about deliberative processes, feel free to reach out!

Max