|
|
|
Careful consideration should be given to deciding which stakeholder groups should be informed and engaged in the preparation and use of a policy brief. Before starting, it may be useful to consider how much effort this warrants.
Answering the four questions in Box 8.1 can help to determine how much effort should be expended on identifying and engaging the stakeholders.
Box 8.1 Questions to clarify how much effort should go into engaging stakeholders* |
|
1. Can anything change as a result of engaging stakeholders? If nothing can change by informing or engaging participants it is may be better to limit engagement efforts to simple, passive dissemination strategies. 2. Is there a demand or interest from stakeholders to be informed or engaged? 3. Do you have the time and resources to engage stakeholders effectively? Engaging stakeholders within only a short period of time is challenging and should be avoided even if it is possible to establish the appropriate processes. Stakeholder engagement can be time-consuming and requires sufficient resources, time, skilled staff, as well as a sufficiently large budget. Preparing high-quality information tailored to target audiences will also place demands on available resources. 4. Are there important risks that need to be managed? Like any activity, efforts to engage stakeholders entail risks. These should be considered early in the process both because they may militate against investing substantially in efforts to involve stakeholders and because they will allow for better risk planning management. Risks related to engaging stakeholders include:
5. What are the risks of not engaging stakeholders? Not informing or engaging stakeholders will also entail risks. A lack of stakeholder input, for example, may impede the implementation of appropriate options or result in poorly-informed decisions. *Partially derived from People and Participation, Involve 20052 (see also www.peopleandparticipation.net/display/ProcessPlanner/Scope+Introduction) |
The identification of stakeholders can be assisted by considering which different categories of stakeholders should be informed and engaged, and the reasons for doing so. Such categories may include:
For each category of stakeholder it may be helpful to consider the potential reasons for engaging particular organisations, groups or individuals in the preparation and use of a policy brief. The main reasons are likely to be to the need to:
In addition, there may be other reasons that are external to the specific policy issue, such as the need to:
The reasons for engagement and the degree of engagement desired will vary across the different kinds of stakeholders. Similarly, the amount and type of information needed and the importance of engaging certain people in the deliberations will also vary. Therefore the way that is best suited to engaging different stakeholders will depend on the particular circumstances. A matrix such as the one in Table 8.2 can be used as the basis for mapping out the reasons for engaging the different kinds of stakeholders. It may also be useful when beginning the process of identifying the key organisations, groups and individuals within each category.
Questions such as the ones listed below can help to clarify further which organisations, groups or individuals to engage from each of the above categories:
After such questions have been answered, stakeholders should be selected from the list of participants who could potentially be involved in the policy brief process.
Some strategies to involve stakeholders require little or no selectivity and may only require the dissemination of information to the general public. However, because time and resources are always limited, the establishment of priorities is advisable. Even a very broadly focused dissemination approach may require setting priorities related, for example, to how much effort should be spent on informing those who are illiterate, speak different languages, or who live in different parts of the country. To be effective, information may need to be tailored to specific audiences and it may therefore be important to determine which groups will be most in need of tailored information. In general, it is better to consider such priorities explicitly in order to maximise the likelihood that the time and resources available will be used efficiently.
Finding the right participants is important in order to ensure that the deliberative processes work well. It may also be essential as a way of ensuring that these processes have legitimacy and credibility.
The aim of selecting participants for participation in deliberative processes should be to:
Certain stakeholder input, such as polls or other kinds of surveys, may require the use of representative samples to ensure greater accuracy. The use of representative samples may also enhance the legitimacy of the deliberative processes.
Special effort may be needed to prevent unintentional exclusion of people and organisations as this could undermine the legitimacy and credibility of the deliberative processes and reinforce existing power inequalities and access to resources.
The following issues should be considered when deciding which stakeholders to include in the deliberative processes: 2
Who decides who will be included
and how – For some processes, the selection of participants
can be a politically charged issue. If this is the case, it may be
useful to ensure that the steps undertaken are done so as
transparently as possible. This will make it easier to answer
questions related to issues such as who was responsible for the
selection decisions made, what the criteria or reasons were when
selecting the participants, and the processes used during the
selection. The actual number of people included in the deliberative
processes should not be an arbitrary one – instead, this should be
based on an understanding of the purpose and context of the process
itself.
The usual people – People should be included because they are the right people. Previous involvement – or the lack of it – should not be used as a reason for exclusion or inclusion
The range of opinions – There may be good reasons for including rather than excluding those who have conflicting opinions. These may be the very people who most need to be engaged. Participation may allow them to gain a degree of ownership of the process and, by doing so, it is possible that they will be more likely to support any final outcome – or at least be less inclined to undermine it.
Conflicting interests – Competing interests are common and cannot be avoided entirely. Health professionals, for example, will have a particular interest in their own profession and in their own particular working conditions. These interests may sometimes compete with the interest they have in doing what is best for patients and communities. Apparent conflicts of interest are also common and occur when a person’s interests lead to their objectivity being questioned by others. If the objective of a deliberative processes is to reach a consensus or make a decision then conflicts of interest should be disclosed using a structured form and it may be appropriate to exclude or restrict the involvement of certain organisations or individuals.8
What’s in it for them? – It is important to consider what stakeholders may want to get out of a deliberative process and what could prevent them from participating. If everyone’s motivations are clear, there will be less confusion and people are more likely to be satisfied with the outcomes.