Ascentum » Public Participation

Starbucks CEO and Public Engagement: “Wake Up!”

Tristan Eclarin — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 13:17:53 +0000

Over the summer, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz began a crusade to end what he, and many others, are calling the political gridlock in Washington. In August, Schultz sent out an e-mail to all of his employees, as well as a number of business leaders, stating that he was finding himself “growing more and more frustrated at the lack of cooperation and irresponsibility among elected officials as they have put partisan agendas before the people’s agenda.” Weeks later, Schultz urged CEOs across the country to withold their political contributions until a “transparent, comprehensive, bipartisan debt-and-deficit package is reached that honestly, and fairly, sets America on a path to long-term financial health and security.” CEOs from many top companies, including those from AOL, Pepsi and Walt Disney, heeded his call and took the pledge. Following this, Schultz sought to broaden his call for action through public engagement.

On September 6, 2011, Schultz worked with the non-profit organization No Labels to conduct a “town hall meeting” in New York, where people could call in to share their perpective on what’s causing the “crisis of confidence” in America. Branded as a “Conversation with America,” Schultz sought outreach through online advertising, mass e-mailing, and by running ads in the New York Times and USA Today, urging “Americans to participate in the forum and insist politicians to end their hyper-partisan behaviour.” Schultz said he was inspired to hold the town hall meeting after receiving hundreds of e-mails and letters from citizens who are struggling in the current U.S. economy.

Now for some points on what went down during the town hall meeting:

- Where was it held? The venue was Cooper Union, a prestigious private college in Manhattan. However, it was slightly repurposed to look like your local Starbucks, complete with eager-looking young people in the background, sipping on their Starbucks drinks and typing away on their Macbooks. The whole thing was streamed online.

- Who was there? An impressive group of individuals hosted the meeting, including a senior political columnist for Newsweek and CNN contributor; the President of the Grady Health Foundation in Atlanta; a Professor of Management from the Harvard Business School; and the President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

- What happened? Over a 90-minute time period, the panel discussed the issues at hand and took questions from call-in viewers. However, the broader focus seemed to be on encouraging people to take the pledge to withhold campaign contributions.

So what should we make of this? From a process perspective, “A Conversation with America” does not represent the most robust public engagement initiative for a number of reasons. The hosts of the meeting were not unbiased and promoted a clear agenda, many of the questions that were asked were very similar and seemed to be a bit leading in nature, and there was corporate branding everywhere. However, I’m assuming that Mr. Schultz is placing more focus on the message rather than the process.

Political ideologies aside, I think this is an inspiring example of high-profile business leaders, particularly those from companies with popular consumer brands, taking a stand and using (some form of) public engagement to get citizens to “wake up”!

-Tristan Eclarin-

Ascentum community engagement project for South East LHIN a “resounding success”

Ellis Westwood — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:24:06 +0000

Earlier this year, Ascentum was hired by the South East Local Health Integration Network (LHIN) to engage community members across southeastern Ontario and gather public input on new health care plans for the region.

We worked closely with staff from the South East LHIN, as well as physicians and other clinical experts, to design a series of deliberative workbooks that local residents could complete online to have their say.

Here’s an excerpt from a recent press release that looked back on what we achieved. According to the South East LHIN’s CEO, Paul Huras:

The fact that we heard from 867 participants who took the time to complete a total of 1775 detailed workbooks is a solid indication that this engagement worked very well,” said Huras. “Each of these participants took the time to learn, understand and comment on workplans that were detailed and complex. The process provided a great deal of quantitative and qualitative feedback that has helped our Clinical Leads and their teams to adjust and fine tune these plans,” he added.

We appreciated the opportunity to work with the LHIN and their partners on this project. From our perspective, they were truly committed to gathering input from their communities and using it to help guide their decision-making.

In fact, you can read the full public report of what we heard during the engagement here. And here’s a link to the full press release.

In support of LHINs

Recently, some people have questioned the value of LHINs. These critics say that LHINs are too costly, or take money away from front line care.

From my perspective, the right question about what LHINs do should be framed differently. Who best understands the health care needs of local communities across Ontario? Local residents and health system planners, or those in a head office thousands of kilometers away?

We have done work for several LHINs, including Share Your Story, Shape Your Care for which the North West LHIN won the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2)’s Innovation of the Year award for 2009.

We’ve always found LHIN staff to be dedicated, hard-working local residents driven by a desire to coordinate health services in a way that reflects local priorities, needs and values. We think their work is important and hope they are able to continue building on the progress already made.

To end, a local MPP for the region once told me “When you get the public involved, you get way better results. When you leave it up to a politician, it takes too much money; it takes too long; and they’ll probably get it wrong!”

- Ellis Westwood -

An alternative view of Alberta: Edmonton, energy, climate change and citizen deliberation

Mary Pat MacKinnon — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:45:12 +0000

The brouhaha against the Keystone XL pipeline once again shines a harsh light on Alberta and its oil sands industry. And the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy’s latest report on the costs of climate change to Canada sharpens the debate.

What flies under the radar in the rest of Canada is the fact that Edmonton City Council recently passed a comprehensive and far reaching environmental strategy called The Way We Green (TWWG). Its goals and policy directions, including on climate change and energy, are nothing if not forward looking and very ambitious.

The Alberta Climate Dialogue project (ABCD) is a five-year university-community initiative (2010-2015) exploring how new forms of citizen participation in policymaking can enhance Alberta responses to climate change (I serve on ABCD’s Steering Committee). ABCD and the Centre for Public Involvement (CPI) are exploring a partnership with the City of Edmonton to co-create a public participation campaign that seeks to advance climate change policy and action in Alberta. This partnership would also advance knowledge, capacity, and practices of citizen dialogue and deliberation in Alberta and beyond.

On September 23, ABCD/CPI hosted a workshop for the City of Edmonton leaders, community stakeholders who were involved in the creation of TWWG, and ABCD’s leading researchers and public participation practitioners (as both presenters and participants). I had the pleasure of facilitating this event which set out to better understand how citizen deliberation can support the City’s responses to energy transition and climate change; leverage expertise to inform the City’s public engagement efforts; and help align key energy and climate change objectives on a public engagement spectrum. Judging from the buzz at tables and the thoughtful contributions about how serious citizen engagement could really help the City administration and Council to implement TWWG, the workshop was a success.

Following on the heels of this workshop, ABCD convened its annual planning session – this year participants contributed their research and practice expertise to support the Edmonton initiative, including design and learning dimensions. Graphic recorder Avril Orloff captured a snapshot of key elements of ABCD’s work and aspirations in the drawing included here (click on the image on this screen and the next to view it in detail).

Stay tuned for the next chapter in the City of Edmonton / ABCD / CPI partnership story – citizens and the City implementing wise choices for environmental sustainability.

-Mary Pat Mackinnon-

@ascentum tweets of the week

Stephan Telka — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:21:41 +0000

Here are some of the Twitter posts and links that we’d like to pass on from this week. You can find us on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ascentum

Survey Results: 54% of Canadians would engage more with government if there were ways to participate online. http://bit.ly/oiW5MX
Retweet from @elliswestwood: National Assembly of Wales video to launch public consultation on bilingual services. http://youtu.be/lyNYZQI-Viw #demopart
@ascentum blog: @nenshi Thanks for inspiring at the Public Consultation & #publicengmt conference in TO this week! You inspired a blog http://bit.ly/qtx5Ka
Video: Interesting facts & figures in this video on the “Social Media Revolution 2011″ http://youtu.be/3SuNx0UrnEo
From the U.S.: The U.S. National Issues Forum is engaging Americans on the National Debt using Second Life http://ncdd.org/5951 #demopart #publicengmt

Public Engagement in Singapore: Preventing Religious & Racial Conflict

Holly Clark — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:46:43 +0000

On September 21^st, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean attended the International Conference on Community Engagement in Singapore. The Conference was specifically aimed to discuss, “Countering Extremism and Building Social Resilience through Community Engagement”.

At the conference, Mr. Teo applauded the success of the Community Engagement Program (CEP) which was launched in 2006 in Singapore to enhance racial and religious harmony. This program was created to strengthen the understanding and ties between people of different races and religions, and build up Singapore’s skills and knowledge in coping with emergencies. Through the program, the community is involved in response plans that are activated when a crisis occurs, and ensures that Singaporeans will work together to cope with them.

As reported in Singapore news on Wednesday, Mr. Teo mentioned how the program has inspired many citizens to take ownership of their future. He reminded Singaporeans that they should be proud of what has been achieved, and strive to bring even more people into the program.

He highlighted the Geylang Serai area, which has the largest concentration of racial and religious organizations in Singapore with some 120 religious institutions, clan associations and civic organizations. In February of this year, a fire broke out at the Chong Hood Lim Association, a Buddhist temple housed within a shophouse in the area. The temple and the Coronation Baptist Church next door became structurally unstable. Upon learning that the church would be unable to conduct service sessions, the temple’s management agreed to share its newly-acquired activity centre nearby to temporarily allow the church to continue conducting service sessions. Mr. Teo said subsequently, the church was able to find its own space, but what was important was the spirit of help from the community that was evident.

He went on to say, “We have learnt from campaigns of the past that a top-down approach may get a project started expeditiously. However, to have it take root and be sustainable in the long term, it has to inspire the ground and gain traction. It is only when the people on the ground take ownership and see meaning in it that the programme works.”

I was inspired to read that Singapore has implemented such socially-empowered engagement. It’s refreshing to know that an ideology we believe in also rings true across seas: That the top can initiate, but ultimately, we can’t ignore the influence that comes from the grassroots beneath. I think this is the path to a better democracy in the long run.

-Holly Clark-

Inspiration and Iron Fists

Joseph Peters — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:58:43 +0000

Rob Mariani and I represented Ascentum at the Strategy Institute’s inaugural Innovations in Public Consultation and Engagement Conference in Toronto this week. It was an interesting event for a couple of reasons. One reason was the “new” diversity of interest, but the other was an inspirational address that caught me by surprise. First, we only knew a handful of participants at the conference. It was nice to meet and see so many different people interested in public participation. From Hydro One, to ViaRail to cities across Canada, public participation is what they are doing or at least is a giant blip on their radar. Times are a changing. There was even a small group who travelled from Singapore – and that is a state that has traditionally held more weight in an iron first than open ears. But let me get to the inspiration. I have heard my fair share of speeches from the stump. I also have a healthy dose of pessimism to go along with my well-worn BS filter (BS = bold but shameful). Naheed Nenshi, the Mayor of Calgary, is the real deal. In a country that aches for political inspiration, the Mayor could be the most promising resource out of Alberta that could be tapped and barreled for use across the country. Why? He gets it. He speaks with candid eloquence. He admits mistakes. He wants to do better. He doesn’t stand for the broken “old ways” of government. He truly believes in the role/value of the citizen in democracy – not just on Election Day, but in the four years between them. He has 52,000 twitter followers. He’s bottom line genuine. I am not 100% sure where Naheed Nenshi sits on the political spectrum. Let’s pretend that it doesn’t really matter. There are a couple of parties looking for leadership – the Tories could even draft him. The fact that he was elected in Calgary might signal that the country may be ready to consider a leader from outside of a Christian faith. What’s important is that in a national role he has the ability to shake up a sleepy system not just with rhetoric or ideology but with a mantra of continuous improvement and value for investment. His vision seems to be grounded in a belief that citizens matter and need a voice, beyond that of an elected representative. Citizen’s need to have their own voice. Let’s hope that the Mayor continues to exercise his own. -Joseph Peters-

Announcement – Mary Pat is becoming a Partner at Ascentum!

Holly Clark — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:34:47 +0000

As the warm air subsides and the seasons shift, the Ascentum team is also feeling some major changes in the atmosphere. It has recently been announced that Ascentum’s Director, Mary Pat Mackinnon, will be promoted to Partner at Ascentum! In her position as Director, Mary Pat has led public and stakeholder engagement initiatives and is integral to the strategic planning work Ascentum does for its clients. She has extensive background in government affairs, public policy research and community engagement practice. As Partner, Mary Pat will not only fulfill her duties as a skilled designer, facilitator and writer, but will also manage Ascentum’s human resources file. Given her approachable nature, it’s agreed that Mary Pat is perfectly suited for her new duties.

To mark this promotion, I thought it might be a good time for reflection. I got a chance to sit down with Mary Pat and ask her a few questions about her new position, her ambitions, and her perspective on the world of public engagement.

What do you hope to accomplish this year in your new position with Ascentum’s clients?

There are three areas I would like to focus on in the year ahead. I want to grow our portfolio of health and labour force related policy engagement work, while also target outreach to public and not-for-profit clients in policy fields that we’ve done less work in, but in which we have much to offer. These could include topics like demographic challenges of aging workforce, citizenship, newcomers’ integration, education and the environment. I think our engagement expertise and products really make a difference because we deliver integrated design, facilitation, analysis and reporting grounded in informed participation approaches that give our clients a return on their investment. Secondly, I’d like to explore opportunities for work in the international arena, building on my past experience and projects – I think it’s an area that holds some real potential. Thirdly, I’d like to think about innovative ways to integrate and scale up our online, social media and in-person engagement processes, drawing on the unique contributions of these three streams.

Why do you think public engagement is important?

I would break it down to three main reasons.

To revitalize democracy, which for me, means greater political accountability, greater legitimacy of public policies, all of which ultimately, strengthens citizenship.
To improve our quality of life. I think that public engagement should both define and sustain what I would call the public good. I mean, it’s the public that should get to decide what kind of society we want. To have sustainable policies, the public needs to play an important role in defining and sustaining them (beyond voting every four years, important at that is).
From a practical perspective, we need better public policies. This means we need more than technical expertise and top down decision making. So many ‘wicked’ problems are complex and involve a myriad of issues, involving critical value-based choices. Good public policy needs to incorporate various streams of evidence, including very importantly public policy preferences.

What do you think is the biggest challenge facing the potential for civic engagement in today’s world?

I think there are several interconnected barriers. Too many decision makers fear losing power and control. There is an inherent reluctance to share power, and reluctance to engage the public in agenda setting. If you don’t give up a bit of power, it’s hard to have authentic engagement. Also election cycles and just in time policy making doesn’t allow for more innovative ways of engaging the public.

And it is also true that many people and decision-makers simply are not aware of what good public engagement looks like or how it can help address problems. Another barrier is the level of distrust and cynicism about government and the public sphere. People wonder “What difference will my contribution make?” Decision-makers conclude “People don’t care – look at the ballot box turnout.” I think people do care, they just need to be reassured that they have the opportunity to contribute. An even more serious problem is apathy. Apathetic citizens are a much bigger problem than cynics because they don’t care that they don’t care.

Which aspect of this work keeps you motivated?

For one, its people. The public – Call me naïve –but all the dialogues I have been involved with tell me that most Canadians, at their core, are reasonable, fair and caring. I really believe that there is a latent public desire to contribute more to community life. I don’t know if I am a pragmatic idealist or an idealistic pragmatist, but personally for me, it’s important to feel like I’m making a positive contribution to Canada. Being part of Ascentum’s team allows me to do that. Secondly, I love learning. The field of public engagement is more of an art than a science. I also find that working with my younger Ascentum colleagues really keeps me au courant!

What’s the most important thing you’ve learned in your experiences?

The most important thing I have learned is that process is as important as content. I have come to believe that achieving the scale of changes we need for more innovative, empathetic and productive communities, knowledge is necessary, but not sufficient. We need to engage our values, our hearts and our heads to make a better community.

What are main issues with regard to civic engagement and citizen involvement at the various levels of government in Canada?

I think the main issues are commitment and resources. If governments could view the public as a source of imagination and innovation, rather than seeing them as a stumbling block and hurdle, we would see the scale and scope of public engagement swell. Conversely, the same is true for the public – government is not the enemy – it is us! And we need to take responsibility to make it as good as it can be, acknowledging that we are imperfect beings in an imperfect but precious world. As Tony Judt puts it in Ill Fares the Land, “if we feel excluded from the management of our collective affairs, we shall not bother to speak up about them. In that case, we should not be surprised to discover that no one is listening to us.” (132, 2011)

What do you see for the future of public engagement?

I don’t have a crystal ball and am long in the tooth to be confident in predicting the future. So often we are wrong. But I think if you look at the trends over the past decades, it is unlikely that governments, not-for-profits and private sector organizations can ignore the impetus for citizens, stakeholders/shareholders, customers and employees to demand greater control of their private and public lives.

Do you think advancements in technology and social media have impacted this push?

I do. Four decades ago, even a decade ago, we had engagement, but we didn’t have the potency and immediacy of social media. It can be a very strong tool for positive change. But it’s not so much the tool itself; it’s how we use it. I think Ascentum uses those tools in a responsible way.

How do you think new technologies and online engagement are affecting in-person engagement at events? Have you noticed a change in human interactions since this technological era?

Well I think human nature doesn’t change, but the ways in which people learn, process and interact definitely is reshaping the social sphere. Technology is way ahead of us and we need to learn how to use it effectively and responsibly. I think we’re still learning, and it’s very exciting and challenging and intellectually stimulating….. So coming back to the future of engagement, I think we have a bigger toolbox to engage far more breadth. The challenge is how do we get depth? The future is not going to be linear. We will have to be more vigilant against simplistic populism, where leaders and people are rushing to simplistic answers to complex problems. The world is not simple; shortcuts, while seductive, can also be dangerous. We need to figure out how to manage the ‘distraction’ reality and cultivate more mindful reflection of what really matters- and to do this online and in-person.

- Holly Clark -

Crowdsourcing: 5 Reasons Why It’s Here to Stay

Ascentum Staff — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:02:37 +0000

From designing marketing campaigns to vetting brand ideas to solving customer service-related issues and shaping new government services, crowdsourcing is a dynamic tool being used ever increasingly by companies to solve some of their most quizzical quandaries. First coined by journalist Jeff Howe in a June 2006 Wired article, the term crowdsourcing can be described as the process by which the power of the many can be leveraged to accomplish feats that were once the domain of an elite few.

L’Oreal, Sony and Toyota have all embraced the preeminence of crowdsourcing, using it to help them generate new ideas for ad campaigns. Mountain Dew has been inviting soft drink enthusiasts to help “shape the flavor, colour, name, logo, and design of the next Mountain Dew” through its crowdsourcing tool Dewmocracy. And in one novel project, a 23-year-old man is using crowdsourcing to navigate the dating world by attempting to go on 30 dates in 30 days, while taking cues from Twitter and Facebook as to how to proceed on each (http://mashable.com/2010/07/12/dating-brian/).

It looks as though crowdsourcing is here to stay – here are 5 reasons why:

It grants access to a diverse range of ideas without a lot of investment – The technology makes it possible to unite large numbers of people who will share several ideas at a relatively stable cost. Time spent collecting data through formal focus groups or market research can also be heavily reduced by using this tool as a creative alternative.
Messaging stands a greater chance of being relevant and authentic – Since the people engaged in the process will likely have a stake in the outcome, the input generated by the community will resonate with the voice of the end user. Also through the selection of people and breadth of ideas, this tool increases the odds of finding something of value.
Crowdsourcing tools are engaging – Whether a person submits her/his own content and ideas or chooses to rate others’ ideas, they are an integral part of the creative process.
It lowers the risk of new product and service introductions – The risks associated with uncertain marketplace demand for a new product / service can be evaluated by inviting participants to comment on what they think should be included.
It builds relationships – Like many social networking tools, crowdsourcing is ultimately a means of connecting with people with similar interests, exchanging ideas, and cultivating lifelong bonds.

-Cassandra Tavares

Participation and Open Government Web Sites

Ascentum Staff — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:12:38 +0000

Joe Goldman, AmericaSpeaks
Joseph Peters, Ascentum

The recently-released Open Government Directive requires all federal agencies to create an open government web site within 60 days that provides the public with opportunities to provide input on the agency’s open government plan, publishes key data sets, and provides information about opportunities to participate in agency activities, among other things.

Here are additional elements that may be included on the sites to address the participation and collaboration goals of the Open Government Directive…