Introduction to techniques and tools

There are a range of techniques and/or tools that can be used by practitioners for conducting engagement with stakeholders.

It is not the intent of this guidance to delve into the detail of every potential technique or tool that can be used for engagement (there are several existing resources that can be consulted, refer to Appendix C for a list), but rather to provide practitioners and companies with guidance on how to select the appropriate techniques/tools to address the core principles of meaningful engagement outlined in Section 1.

There are a range of factors which influence which techniques or tools are selected by practitioners which are outlined in this section.

LightbulbTip: When selecting engagement techniques and/or tools it is important to consider the level and intensity of engagement to be conducted. The levels of engagement are usually depicted as a spectrum – inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and empower. Meaningful engagement moves beyond simply informing stakeholders but will usually involve each aspect of the spectrum to varying degrees. Similarly, for engagement to be meaningful, the intensity of engagement should be commensurate to the concerns expressed or expected from stakeholders and the magnitude of identified risks.
LightbulbTip: Understanding the purpose of engagement is critical in shaping outcomes. Successful outcomes are experienced when companies reframe their thinking around stakeholder engagement to focus on how stakeholders can ‘engage’ with the company rather than simply ‘deal’ with them.
Techniques and tools selection – consideration checklist

1. Purpose: what are the strategic reasons for selecting the technique/tool? Is selection simply because it has always been conducted in this manner, or is this the best option to help to actively and inclusively engage with the stakeholder(s) identified for the project/activity? Will the technique/tool help foster trust with the stakeholder(s)?​

2. Stakeholder suitability: is the technique or tool suitable for multiple stakeholder groups or is it to be used for a specific group that is being targeted as part of a stakeholder engagement strategy/plan? Will the technique/tool help to engage with disadvantaged or vulnerable groups? Engagement needs and preferences of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups (e.g. languages, venue accessibility) tend to differ from broader project/activity stakeholders. Prior stakeholder experience with the technique/tool will also help to discern whether the method selected is appropriate.​

3. Stakeholder size: how will the selected technique/tool help to reach the stakeholders intended? Will the technique/tool facilitate engagement with larger groups, or is it to be used for smaller/targeted groups of stakeholders? ​

4. Accessibility: what level of access do stakeholders have to the engagement technique/tool? For instance, what degree of connectivity do stakeholders need to be able to receive electronic media (e.g. digital exclusion due to lack of internet access)? Do stakeholders need to be supplied with per diem and/or transport to participate?​

5. Execution: how easy is it to use and customize the technique or tool to suit stakeholders or engagement needs? If it is electronic media, how fast is the on-boarding process? Is training required for the tool?​

6. Analysis/analytical capability: how will the stakeholder feedback be captured, analyzed and reported on through the engagement technique or tool? Different tools can assist in the collection of quantitative and/or qualitative data from stakeholders, which can then help to more readily provide insights and identify trends relating to stakeholder views, opportunities and issues.​

7. Resourcing arrangements: how resource-intensive is it to develop and deploy the technique/tool? It is important to consider the availability of time, materials and/or labor required to carry out the technique/tool. These resources may relate to costs (financial), as well as practitioner resourcing over the life of the project/activity.

Overview of techniques ​and tools

The techniques/tools that can be employed by practitioners and companies for stakeholder engagement can be divided into four basic categories:​

  • Large group formats​
  • Small group formats​
  • Individual/household formats​
  • Electronic media​

An overview of the benefits/advantages, limitations/ challenges and usage considerations is provided to aid practitioner understanding of these techniques/tools.

A list of resources that provide a more in-depth understanding of these techniques/tools is provided in Appendix C.

Search
Case studies

Case study 3 talks to using a tailored engagement program to reach the affected community.

Large group formats

Stakeholder engagement undertaken with large groups of stakeholders is typically used by companies for projects/activities as it tries to maximise attendees, minimise time obligations and is often stipulated in regulatory requirements. Large group format engagement may include public hearings/meetings or open information sessions and are often conducted in centrally located public venues.

  • Benefits/advantages
    Chevron-down

    Broad reach; can include visual and verbal mediums; open and interactive environment; provides an opportunity to discuss stakeholder issues/concerns; collective feedback and perception sharing; facilitation of personal connections for stakeholders and project/activity team members; opportunity to cover multiple aspects of the project/activity; readily disseminates information; and provides opportunities for exploring alternative strategies and building consensus.

  • Limitations/challenges
    Chevron-down

    Geographically constrained to the location/s selected; stakeholder numbers limited by venue; not all stakeholders can/ want to attend; potential for ‘hijacking’ of meeting discourse; and hidden costs (e.g. venue, advertising, refreshments).

  • Usage considerations
    Chevron-down

    Venue selection; availability of resources; accessibility for stakeholders; stakeholder requirements (e.g. language, literacy, cultural norms); practitioner training/response to stakeholders and management of dominant voices to enable stakeholder participation; additional tools to enhance discussion (e.g. maps); and feedback collection.

Small group formats

Small group engagement techniques/tools are more refined with engagement limited to smaller stakeholder groups. In doing so, the participatory nature of the engagement activity is increased. Small group format techniques/tools may include consultative committees, consultative deliberation; focus group meetings; workshops/seminars; and panel surveys.

  • Benefits/advantages
    Chevron-down

    Facilitation of participation in decision-making; increases trust and accountability between stakeholders and the company; increases transparency; engages a cross-section of the community (including disadvantaged/ vulnerable groups); helps reduce individual biases; focused discussions; provides opportunities to explore alternative strategies; and more targeted feedback collection.

  • Limitations/challenges
    Chevron-down

    Participant/ representative selection can be politically/culturally sensitive; potential to overlook disadvantaged/ vulnerable group inclusion; increased stakeholder expectations; potential for outcomes to be driven by perceptions not realities; requires substantial investment of resources (time/effort); willingness of stakeholders to meet; and limited number of participants.

  • Usage considerations
    Chevron-down

    Venue selection; availability of resources; accessibility for stakeholders; stakeholder requirements (e.g. language, literacy, cultural norms); additional tools to enhance discussion (e.g. maps); potential use of third-party to assist; and feedback collection.

LightbulbTip: Using a combination of techniques/tools will help to engage with a wider variety of stakeholders, including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, and stakeholders of different gender and various age groups.

Individual/household formats

Stakeholder engagement at an individual or household level generally requires the use of techniques/tools which are more personal in nature, providing a means to directly connect with stakeholders. These techniques/ tools may include one-on-one meetings, household outreach/visitation and key informant interviews.

  • Benefits/advantages
    Chevron-down

    Focused discussions; facilitation of participation in decision-making; increases trust and accountability between stakeholders and the company; engages a cross- section of the community (including disadvantaged/ vulnerable groups); provides opportunities to explore alternative strategies; and more targeted feedback collection.

  • Limitations/challenges
    Chevron-down

    Stakeholder selection for interviews/meetings can be politically/culturally sensitive; increased stakeholder expectations; personalisation of project/activity concerns; potential for outcomes to be driven by perceptions not realities; requires substantial investment of resources (time/effort); willingness of stakeholders to meet; and limited number of participants.

  • Usage considerations
    Chevron-down

    Venue/location selection; availability of resources; accessibility for stakeholders; stakeholder requirements (e.g. language, literacy, cultural norms); additional tools to enhance discussion (e.g. maps); and feedback collection opportunities.

LightbulbTip: Targeted interviews with stakeholders from disadvantaged/vulnerable groups will typically allow for greater depth of insight, as it will reduce the chance of self-censorship.

Electronic media

Electronic media includes a range of tools used to interact and engage with stakeholders in relation to a project/activity. These methods include the use of chatbots, online interactive maps and discussion forums, digital presentation software, digital engagement platforms, email and text messages, e-newsletters, gamification and virtual reality, and social media (e.g. X, Facebook, Instagram).

  • Benefits/advantages
    Chevron-down

    Broad reach; accessible on a 24/7 basis; multiple languages; ability to share documents and videos to assist with engagement; interactive or immersive experiences for stakeholders; real-time feedback and stakeholder perceptions/ reactions; provides responses to issues/concerns raised in a timely manner; can provide more tailored responses; and potential to reduce stakeholder fatigue.

  • Limitations/challenges
    Chevron-down

    Requires access to the internet or social media platforms for stakeholders; can be challenging to increase stakeholder traffic; may require sign-up which may mean stakeholders are reluctant to participate; conversational ‘hijacking’; requires sufficient staffing to respond in real-time; can be seen as impersonal means of engagement; and may lead to misinterpreted messaging.

  • Usage considerations
    Chevron-down

    Use of third-party distributors/providers; requires a company manager to curate content and a clear protocol for company use; selection of platforms; stakeholder access/digital literacy (e.g. internet, phone, computers); sign up and opt-out methods; publicisation of the platform used; and volume of responses may overload practitioners.

Search
Case studies

Case study 2 provides an example of how electronic media can be used to reach stakeholders.

E-mail alerts

Sign up to receive Ipieca's e-news
Climate
Nature
People
Sustainability
Marine spill
Please confirm that you are happy to receive newsletters from Ipieca: