Difference between revisions of "Expectations for E-consultation"

Revision as of 13:14, 12 April 2007

The Consulters

Researchers were keen to identify initial expectations of the consulters for the E-Consultation. It must be reiterated that this was the first e-consultation ever conducted by the Wheel. When asked what the advantages of using e-technology would be, the representative from the Wheel stated:

I think expectations from the point of view from the Wheel is that we would learn and experience another method of reaching out the clients that we would seek to service or facilitate. Our expectation would be that it would improve the opportunity to do that because it is breaking away from traditional methods, which we have had problems with, where you can’t get everyone in a room. So by using a virtual medium we would hope that it would increase that participation rate basically.

While getting appropriate numbers of people to participate is seen as a critical problem for many of the consulters that we talked to in the course of this research, this respondent also pointed another key issue for the Community and Voluntary sector, access to technology:

It is recognised that as a sector, there are limitations and challenges in so far as many people operating in the sector do not have access…So us as the Wheel would like to explore this area, we do have reservations about whether or not people will be able to participate. But if we can share the burden of that quest with Maynooth or Queens University then of course, we are willing to embark on it.

The Consultees

A number of representatives from the Community and Voluntary sector agreed to take part in a survey in order to gauge expectations for engaging in the e-consultation. These participants were initially contacted by e-mail through the Wheel’s membership mailing list. All participants had access to computers and the Internet.

The majority of participants had at least some previous experience of engaging in public consultations. Instances of these experiences include:

...attendance at meetings representing a community partnership—representatives from Dept of community and family affairs in attendance…’ ‘Forum compiled a 'Model' of good consultation. This was tested on the Co. Monaghan Heritage Plan’ ‘We have submitted detailed written response to consultation on Town and Local Development Plans.

Some participants felt that the experience was largely negative— ‘We have never seen any tangible change in plans by our doing so.’ Another commented ‘…Initially felt good and that we were being listened to; however deeper into the process it felt to me as if the local authority was just checking off the public consultation box.’ However, another respondent was more positive about his experience:

Very positive. Effective consultation is imperative for PAUL Partnership. As an area-based partnership company it is vital that PAUL's strategies and programmes are validated by consultation with all partners and the community and voluntary sector in particular. It is also a central goal of the Partnership to ensure that the voice of the community is enabled to be heard at wider fora for decision-making in social inclusion, local and community development and local governance.

Respondents were asked to list any other resources that would be necessary in order to make participation in consultation easier. One respondent suggested ‘inter agency consultation with state bodies’, another pointed to ‘excellent and sustainable networking pathways between stakeholders’, while another proposed ‘more power in decision making as to when, where etc., meeting are held’. In the same vein, another suggested ‘more evidence that it [consultation] makes any difference’.. When asked resources would be needed in order to make participation in consultation easier, respondents identified ‘higher proficiency in technology’ and more ‘skills training’ as the most important factors. Significantly, the need for more financial and personnel resources were viewed as less important.

Next, respondents were asked to state the type of expectations they had from the e-consultation. Responses included:

‘experience an e consultation and how it works as a form of communications’ ‘A clearer picture of how to use e-mail and internet to promote and advance our project’ ‘After taking part in this consultation process I would at least expect to receive feed back on the results received and information as to how the results will be used. Mindless consultation and lack of credibility can often be the reason for lack of future participation. If ones view is not given proper consideration or acknowledgement the incentive certainly decreases to participate in future.’ ‘Hopefully the real volunteers will be listened to and catered for; often the organising or facilitator arranges things which are easier for them, not necessarily easier for us. I would hope that free, easily accessibility for all people in our committee would be addressed. Perhaps allowing local parish halls or other community facilities to have a 'hub' where anyone can access and have their issues or ideas heard. Women, children and those usually not at the table making decision that effect their lives should be especially thought of during the consultation process.’ ‘That it will make sensible and usable recommendations with regard to the form, and use of electronic surveying, so that real effects can be derived from it’ ‘PAUL has multiple interests in the potential of e-consultation methodologies: Enhanced capacity for consultation for strategic and operational planning; Ability to enhance the operational capacities of the community and voluntary sector, especially its ability to highlight its particular perspective; Identification of new ways in which bodies such as the Limerick City Social Inclusion Measures Working Group and Limerick City Community & Voluntary Forum can exploit e-technologies and use them to communicate more effectively, raise awareness of social inclusion issues and capture the views, priorities and concerns of a wide audience.’ ‘that my views will be heard and taken into account.' ‘I would like to be able to learn techniques for divining public opinion without having to spend a lot of money! I am presuming this will entail clever use of new technology, and I am hoping to gain a lot from that.’ ‘That it will make sensible and usable recommendations with regard to the form, and use of electronic surveying, so that real effects can be derived from it’

Respondents were then asked to articulate expected outcomes from the processes. These included:

‘In particular, to identify ways in which PAUL Partnership, Limerick City Community Forum and Limerick City Social Inclusion Measures Working Group can use e-technologies to effectively communicate with and harness the views of the community sector as well as identify ways in which that sector can avail of the potential for consultation, make its voice heard and overcome the risk of digital exclusion’. ‘That positive change will happen. That new technologies will enable greater ease of access to peoples opinions and ideas.’ ‘I would hope to be able to use the resources we currently have to better effect. Also, to be able to identify what we need to more effectively communicate/canvass opinion among our target audiences.’ ‘Better proficiency with internet and advise on how to use it to our advantage.’ ‘1) Free easy access to technology to allow all people of the community to have their issues aired. 2) Special attention to be given to those usually absent from the decision making process; i.e. disabled (incl. those with mental health issues), women, children, teenagers and displaced (incl those from the travelling community). 3) To establish a fun element to encourage people to become involved in their community and to come back. 4) Allow local—grass roots projects access to the same resources that recognised organisations / charities enjoy.’ ‘Proposal and technology for effective e-consultation.’