I’ve been designing and facilitating a few new forms of consultation events this year. Mostly I have used a Civic Assembly (CA) format. These types of assembly are trending at the moment as a way of ‘fixing’ the democratic deficit where there seems to be a disconnect between professional politics and people. The disconnect that has led to the howl of riots and populism.
Having run a few sessions now, I have some perspective on what works and what can be problematic. As a One Stop Shop solution to the vast issues around modern politics and engagement, I am obviously wary. Like CoDesign, this is an intervention within multiple systems. The system layer problems are not fixed by such an intervention.
Rather than trying to explain the pro’s and con’s, let me describe a short prototype workshop which might allow you and the people, communities and organisations you are part of understand them experientially. I’m a great believer in the Japanese idea of Action Intuition: comprehension thru doing.
4 1/2
4 1/2 is a workshop. Ask 4 questions and deliberate for 1/2 a day.
This is explicitly small and contained.
I have just tried to fill in the UK government’s Artificial Intelligence consultation online. It sprawls across pages of questions and references. It is close to unanswerable while having a clear bias to what responses are desired. It is a consultation framed by presumed superior knowledge and authority.
That sprawl and that presumption is what a CA workshop must avoid.
Clear questions and consequences
The hardest thing about the workshops I have run this year is getting to a short list of clear questions from the clients. What do they want to know in order to take action?
Clear questions connect to actual consequences thru deliberation in the assembly. That is the point: people involved in process that leads to actual decisions for action.
4 questions is enough. 1 question may be sufficient if it is phrased well and fully linked to action that an organisation can and will take.
This is the fundamental idea of Seriousness in assemblies. The people involved are being taken seriously and the answers they create have serious consequences.
For a prototype workshop, keep the questions tight. Partially because you need to practice learning how to do this well. Partially because the consequences need to be something you can actually deliver (whatever the participants decide).
Too loose on the questions and the workshop will fail to conclude anything.
Too broad on the possible actions to be taken and the workshop fails as it destroys that opening offer of Seriousness. Civic Assemblies are about sharing power and trust. If the people who hold power refuse to act on the discussions then it is a failure.
That possibility of failure is why small prototypes are better. It is sometimes hard to know how management and colleagues will react after a workshop. The consequences are a test for both the participants and the organisation. Both are seeking trust, both are wary and yet it is always the organisation that truly holds power.
This is the democratic deficit that people recognise. That people with power in a organisation recognise and praise democratic ideas of sharing voice and power up until the point that action is required of the organisation.
Prototype to understand why your organisation can or cannot truly support consequences.
Use the small workshop to practice finding clear questions and responding to actual consequences.
Short time
1/2 a day is not long. Most of the workshops I have run in civic assembly format this year have been that long. In design and facilitation terms, it means being very explicit about form of activities and format of responses.
For a prototype workshop, this short time is good. It is hard to find time and funding for big events. Do something small so as to experience it together and understand its meaning.
Civic Assemblies, in their more established sense, are huge. Lasting months and demanding a lot of support. This vastness is not a problem for national governments or corporations. It means diverting funds from their more regular formats of public consultation but it is not beyond their consultancy budgets.
Prototyping something small is a way for local organisations to understand if the format makes sense with limited budgets and if it is good alternative use of existing funds for larger institutions.
4 1/2 is a short and constricted version of civic assembly format but it is still a way of taking the idea and the people involved seriously. Simply continuing to use the historic methods of consultation or ignoring the voices of disconnected people is the unserious approach.
Just do it
I recommend 4 1/2 as it is the clearest version of a method to try and bridge a huge social and political problem.
It is not the solution but it is a way of exploring a path.
Do it to understand what it could be.
Do it to understand what is cannot be.
Do it to understand how participants react.
Do it to understand how your organisation reacts.
I am happy to chat more about ideas and possibilities for free. I use Calendly https://calendly.com/a-somerville-fuq/introductory-call or email me at a.somerville@acuity.design.