Key considerations
In addition to the factors that influence the selection of engagement techniques/tools and communication methods/channels, there are four key considerations that need to be understood by practitioners and companies to assist in making engagement more meaningful for stakeholders.
These considerations are common for all projects/ activities conducted globally and represent both emerging and existing trends, and existing realities, present within the wider socio-cultural context.
Jump to learn more about a specific key consideration:
Digitalisation is a global trend; tools such as virtual reality, videos, mobile devices and social media can be useful to engage and communicate with stakeholders.
The recognised benefits of digital techniques/tools and communication methods/channels include:
- Potential increase in cost effectiveness
- Potential to reach a broad suite of stakeholders in a short period of time
- Ability to easily tailor engagement tools to achieve a fit-for-purpose outcome
- Increased efficiency in data collection and subsequent display for stakeholders
- Potential to help maintain long-term relationships through increased connectivity
Although there are a range of benefits, there are also barriers that require consideration from practitioners, such as:
- Lack of knowledge amongst stakeholders on how to access or use such tools, given the emerging nature of the technology
- Digital tools require a range of resources and in some instances a connection to the internet, which may not be readily available in all geographies or amongst some stakeholder groups
- It can be perceived as an un-appealing or impersonal form of engagement
- Digital engagement can present security concerns when it comes to data privacy
Guidelines, such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines for people with disabilities, will need to be considered when seeking digital techniques/tools or communication methods/channels.
Suitability factors
The suitability of digital techniques/tools or communication methods/channels is dependent on several factors, including:
- Accessibility and connectivity of identified stakeholders
- Existing stakeholder knowledge in relation to the specific platform used
- Understanding of the technology/digital literacy
- Language and cultural issues which may limit restrict
usage
Data privacy
- Companies and practitioners using digital engagement tools need to ensure that the information and data collected during engagement and uploaded into management systems remains confidential, with the appropriate data encryptions, internal safeguards and oversight enacted
- Companies should ensure that the necessary policies and programmes are in place prior to practitioners conducting digital engagement with stakeholders
- The digitisation of techniques/tools for stakeholder engagement and communication methods/channels has the potential to increase transparency in online data and in-turn, increase the risk of retaliation
This is a challenge for practitioners, particularly in locations where local communities and government officials may have a limited understanding of and experience with specific industries (e.g. oil and gas, renewables) and their associated potential impacts and benefits, and/or where external factors such as time availability or access/ cultural constraints are an impediment (refer to the challenges and barriers in Section 1).
Where this is the case, capacity building will often form a key part of the engagement process. Capacity building can increase knowledge and awareness, encourage collaborative action, help sustain long-term commitments and therefore help to achieve the core principles of meaningful engagement.
Capacity building is not limited to building stakeholder understanding of a project/activity (and its associated impacts or benefits). It also includes building capacity to take part in the engagement (and decision-making) process, as some stakeholders may have had limited prior experience accessing engagement opportunities.
Accordingly, the previous experience that stakeholders have had with engagement should be considered when selecting the techniques/tools and communication methods/channels. Where physical access is an issue, companies may provide transport or financial assistance (per diems) to stakeholders to facilitate participation. Where this occurs however, companies should be transparent with stakeholders about the reasoning for providing this assistance so as not to bring about perceptions of favoritism or impropriety, in line with their respective anti-bribery and corruption policy.
A range of engagement techniques and tools, such as visualisations, gamification and virtual reality, and information sessions have been shown to help enhance a stakeholder’s understanding of the scale of a project/ activity and the nature of the expected impacts and/or changes, along with increasing stakeholder interest and reducing stakeholder fatigue.
Barriers to engagement: disadvantaged and vulnerable groups are those who may be disproportionally impacted by a project/activity, cannot access project/activity information, or are unable to articulate their concerns and priorities due to barriers such as language (e.g. indigenous languages), education (e.g. low literacy rates), religion (e.g. religious restrictions), ethnicity (e.g. cultural sensitivities), gender (e.g. status of women), disability (e.g. limited accessibility), poverty (e.g. digital exclusion), physical access (e.g. remote locations), or timing of meetings (e.g. when undertaking livelihood activities).
Lack of voice: people influenced by these factors are often marginalised and do not feel that they have a ‘voice’ in the process or associated decision-making activities.
Selection of tools/techniques and communication methods/channels: the barriers that exist for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups need to be considered when selecting the types of engagement techniques/tools, as well as communication methods/channels. Some tools can be modified to address the needs of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups.
Self-definition/involvement in design: initial engagement with disadvantaged or vulnerable groups will help to define how they want and/or are able to be engaged, where the engagement takes place and the best methods for conveying or sharing information.
Previous experience: techniques/tools that have demonstrated effectiveness when engaging with disadvantaged and/or vulnerable groups include visualisations, information sessions, digital participatory tools and the performance theatre.
Technique/tool modification
- Techniques/tools have the potential to be developed in multiple languages and formats to meet the needs of vulnerable groups. This could include translating printed collateral and/or developing videographic content in local languages.
- Ensure that meetings and information sessions are hosted in venues and locations that facilitate access to people with disabilities (e.g. ramps, elevators) and are held at times that are suitable for vulnerable group attendance (e.g. single parents may require play areas for children, gender inclusive locations).
- The use of visuals (e.g. videos, pictures, maps) or performance theatre techniques can be useful when engaging groups, especially those with lower literacy rates.
- To be inclusive of gender related concerns, companies can look to create a ‘gender balance’ within the practitioner team undertaking engagement, hold gender-specific forums, or provide alternative venues/times for engagement that suit particular gender groups.
- Consideration should be given to how the vulnerable or disadvantaged group will access and engage with the technique/tool. For example, establishing a community ‘shop front’, setting up an information stand during community festivals/events, or using tablets loaded with information during face-to-face engagements.
When conducting stakeholder engagement activities there is potential that some individuals or groups may elect not to participate due to the risk (perceived or actual) of retaliation against them by the company, authorities, or other stakeholders and external parties. This retaliation could be derived from their reactions or opinions in relation to the project/activity and will be dependent upon the local context.
The following should be considered by companies and/ or practitioners to reduce the potential for retaliation to occur:
- Ensuring inclusion: dissatisfaction, which can give rise to retaliation, can be borne out of perception that only stakeholders supportive of a project/activity have been consulted (i.e. inherent bias within the process). This perception can be addressed by ensuring that a variety of stakeholders have been included (not just those supportive of the project/activity) and that all stakeholders are informed about upcoming engagement initiatives.
- Appropriate venue selection and stakeholder composition: the selection of a private venue away from surveillance (active or passive) can help to reduce the potential for retaliation to occur. In addition, when organising focus groups or small groups for discussion, consideration of group composition, size and stakeholder dynamics is important to reduce potential friction and suspicion between stakeholders.
- Ensuring confidentiality: ensuring that stakeholder information is recorded and managed in a secure manner is important to avoid the potential for retaliatory action against those engaged (and enhance trust with stakeholders). Any concerns raised around the confidentiality of the engagement process should be discussed and addressed with stakeholders prior to commencement of engagement.
- Use of intermediaries: companies can consider the use of a third-party intermediary (e.g., an interlocutor or facilitator) to conduct the engagement with stakeholders or provide avenues for anonymous feedback. Doing so will remove the potential for individual stakeholders to be identified and their data obtained by ill-intending persons.
- Employing security services: if needed, security services can be employed to protect stakeholders. Where this occurs, however, appropriate vetting of security personnel and training (e.g. human rights training) will be required to ensure any existing tensions between stakeholders are not exacerbated further.
