These opinions may, or may not, have a direct relevance to the fight to save Stoke's schools.

Nobody with formal links to Haywood Engineering College runs this site.
The school has no control over its content.
- - - - - -

In idle moments, the mind is sometimes drawn to wondering how effective the Schools Reorganisation consultation has been. Was it a genuine consultation, with the Council really listening to the community, or was it an information exercise undertaken under false headlines, so that the correct government boxes could be ticked?

The fact that these questions are being, and need to be, asked is indicative of one major failing - the communication skills of Stoke-on-Trent City Council.

The way that the glossy green booklet was produced smacked of "This is what we're going to do - lump it!".

This attitude is no longer acceptable. The peasants revolted en masse!

To be able to consult properly, one needs to be able to communicate effectively. How public or private sector organisations, in this case the Council and Serco, communicate and consult is a vital part of effective government. Good communication and consultation will lead to better partnerships which help to ensure the delivery of high quality services and improved planning that meets the needs and aspirations of the communities served.

All the disparate communities of Stoke-on-Trent now need to hear from all levels of the City Council, Officers or Elected: "This is our goal - how can we work together to achieve it?"

Effective communication:

• strengthens relationships between a Council and its electorate so that each understands the roles and responsibilities of the other;
• recognises that a two-way process means receiving as well as giving messages, listening as well as talking;
• means sharing significant changes or progress so that others are not taken by surprise;
• is the sharing of information in a language and formats that are accessible to all;
• enables each party to have reasonable expectations of the other;
• allows the understanding of roles and boundaries to reduce duplication and make better use of resources;
• reduces the potential for misunderstandings, disagreements and disputes;
• prevents a problem from turning into a crisis;
• provides a means of sharing best practice, innovative ideas and experience in specialist fields;
• enables the development of a shared vision where everyone moves towards a common goal.

Once effective channels of communication are opened, in a transparent and honest manner, consultation can begin.

But what exactly is consultation? There are a myriad of definitions; the following are but two:

Consultation is a time-limited exercise when we provide specific opportunities for all those who wish to express their opinions on a proposed area of our work (such as identifying issues, developing or changing policies, testing proposals or evaluating provision) to do so in ways which will inform and enhance that work.

Offering some options, listening to feedback, but not allowing new ideas.

The Rowntree Foundation proposes a five-rung ladder of participation which relates to the stance an organisation promoting participation may take:


Information: merely telling people what is planned.
Consultation: offering some options, listening to feedback, but not allowing new ideas.
Deciding together: encouraging additional options and ideas, and providing opportunities for joint decision-making.
Acting together: not only do different interests decide together on what is best, they form a partnership to carry it out.
Supporting independent community interests: local groups or organisations are offered funds, advice or other support to develop their own agendas within guidelines.

Information-giving and consultation, as defined above, are often wrongly presented as participation. This misrepresentation can lead to disillusionment among community interests, or to pressure for more involvement with the potential for serious conflict and delay.

It is always far more productive for all concerned if organisations promising involvement are clear in their initial stance, even if the degree of participation offered is limited. One stance, or level, is not necessarily better than any other; ­ it is rather a matter of "horses for courses". Organisations promoting involvement should be prepared to negotiate greater degrees of participation if that will achieve common goals.

Understanding participation involves understanding power: the ability of the different interests to achieve what they want. Power will depend on who has information and money. It will also depend on people's confidence and skills. Many organisations are unwilling to allow people to participate because they fear loss of control: they believe there is only so much power to go around, and giving some to others means losing their own. Joseph Rowntree Foundation

It is sincerely to be hoped that, in this particular situation, Stoke-on-Trent City Council will not be bound by the definition of consultation as given by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Rather, it would be preferable, and immensely more productive, if they were to promote the "acting together" level.

For the sake of argument, in the following paper, a definition of consultation similar to that given by the Scottish Executive will be used.

Consultation is one way to involve others in the decision-making process. There are various other ways of involving people, depending on how much influence others will have on the final outcome.

Consultation: Is the intention to seek the views of others before a policy or service is developed? By taking this approach, it is intended to consider the views of other groups and people in the decision-making process.

Delegation: Where others have the skills, knowledge and experience, is there an intention to delegate the decision-making process to them? For example: give a local youth group the money to develop a skate park themselves.

Information: Is the intention to give information about decisions already made? Often decisions are publicised and explained before implementation without allowing others to make changes.

The method chosen will depend on the individual circumstances. There will need to be a clear understanding of the aims of each particular exercise. The Schools "consultation" in Stoke, by the definitions given above, seems to the people to have been an "information" exercise, although it is hoped that it will be proved to have evolved into a true consultation.

Before consultation begins, there must be effective engagement with, and effective participation by, the target community. To achieve effective engagement, it is essential to:

• design a consultation strategy that is appropriate for the objectives of the exercise and the needs of the targeted audience;
• treat the exercise as a dynamic process, reviewing and adjusting strategy as necessary;
• provide all respondents and consultees with feedback on the exercise.

Effective participation is most likely when the participants themselves are satisfied with the level at which they are involved. People are most likely to be committed to carrying something through if they have a stake, or involvement, in the idea. One of the biggest barriers to action is 'not invented here'. The antidote is to allow people to say 'we thought of that'. In practice that means running brainstorming workshops, helping people think through the practicality of ideas, and negotiating with others a result which is acceptable to as many people as possible.

Below are shown some common clichés that consultors use. Careful thought must be given to all three, and solutions acceptable to the consultees must be found.

"What we need is a public meeting" Meeting the public is essential, but the conventional set-up with a fixed agenda, platform and rows of chairs is a stage set for conflict. Among the problems are: The audience will contain many different interests, with different levels of understanding and sympathy. It is very difficult to keep to a fixed agenda; people may bring up any issue they choose and organisers look authoritarian if they try and shut people up. Few people get a chance to have a say.

"A good leaflet, video and exhibition will get the message across" These may well be useful tools, but it is easy to be beguiled by the products and forget what is the purpose of using them. In developing materials, consideration must be given to: What level of participation is appropriate? If it is anything more than information-giving, then feedback and other people's ideas and commitment are being sought. High-cost presentations suggest minds are already made up. What response is sought ­ and can the organisation handle it? Could more be achieved with lower-cost materials and face-to-face contact?

"There's no time to do a proper consultation" While that may be the case if the timetable is imposed externally, it should not be used as an excuse to duck difficult questions.

True consultation is a two-way process that aims to:

• enable others to contribute to the process of developing policies and services;
• demonstrate a commitment to be open and accountable;
• lead to more realistic and robust policies and procedures that better reflect individual and community needs and wishes;
  
• create a working partnership and mutual understanding with those consulted;
• enable policy development and service planning to be influenced by a wide range of experience and expertise;
• provide opportunities to review policies and procedures;
• help plan, prioritise and deliver better services.

The approach taken should be flexible and respond to the needs of those being consulted. All forms of consultation should be easily accessible and all consultation documents should be concise, clearly written in simple jargon-free language appropriate to the audience at which they are aimed.

Many, if not most, consultations are forced on public bodies by law. Statutory consultations prescribe minimum standards and timescales. When bodies, private or public, are under pressure and eager to get on with their specialised task, in this case reorganising secondary education, they are only ever going to do "statutory consultation", since "proper consultation" is orders of magnitude away from how they are thinking. Performance merely to the minimum statutory requirements is often not enough in the eyes of the consulted. Surrey County Council asks this series of questions in its Research Governance Framework - Annex F of August 2005 - Is the consultation statutory? Are you sure you are fulfilling minimum standards? What extra value, if any, can you add to a statutory consultation? 

What does the term "extra value" mean?

Does the CC wish to do a "super consultation", contacting and engaging with all the people concerned by the proposals?

Or does it mean "extra value for money", leading inevitably to an inability to see things from the Community's point of view?

As is now happening in Stoke-on-Trent, it is up to the Community to reject the inadequate, and to DEMAND a proper consultative exercise.

Incidentally, Surrey CC also asks:

• Have you considered the need to inform consultees, up-front, of the parameters of the consultation – what can be changed and what cannot?
• Have you considered the need to tell consultees, up-front, who will make decisions, and when?
• Have you considered the need to explain to consultees how their answers will inform decisions?

Effective consultation also:

• values the input from participants;
• identifies problems quickly, enabling matters to be put right early on;
• helps to avoid incorrect assumptions and misunderstanding at later stages;
• helps to keep the people involved in and informed about policy developments and avoids unnecessary surprises.

Consultation should be be based on the following principles:

• Proper and timely publicity for the consultation: publicity about forthcoming consultations encourages wider involvement and allows those affected time to plan their work.
• Early planning and consultation. This will allow communities and organisations time to seek and represent the diverse views of their members and help ensure that the maximum benefit is gained from the consultation exercise.
• Allowing reasonable timescales for response. A reasonable minimum, not necessarily the statutory minimum, period for consultations must be planned, and must take account of particular times in the calendar when additional work may be more difficult to accommodate, for example holiday periods. If this is not possible, then the reasons must be clearly explained, as sometimes external pressures can affect good intentions.
• Openness and honesty. Consultation should be meaningful and open if it is to have credibility and allow everyone to make the best use of their time and resources to deliver useful results. Specific roles must be made clear. Who has responsibility for what and how much influence others may have must be explained.
• Allocation of sufficient resources. Limited funds or personnel can restrict the breadth or depth of consultation and undermine the intention to be open and honest.
  
• Be inclusive. It is important to understand that a variety of approaches will be required as there are those who are less likely to feel comfortable with, and take part in, the usual channels of communication for reasons relating to race, ethnicity, language, disability, age, location, ability to communicate, low income, etc.
• Keep Talking. Consultation is just one part of an ongoing dialogue, which can help to keep everyone informed about developments, and avoid unnecessary surprises. Continuous dialogue can improve the development and delivery of programmes, policies and services, and help to improve mutual understanding, deliver successful outcomes and reduce the need for big consultation exercises.
• Give feedback. People need to be told what has happened as a result of the consultation – even if that is a decision not to do anything – and why. Careful analysis of the responses and participant feedback must be built into the consultation programme, and be reflected in both the timescales required and the resource allocation. Also, publicity about the results of the consultation should be given in more general terms so that those groups who were unable to respond are still kept informed.
• Clear communication. All consultation documents need to be concise and clearly laid out, avoiding jargon and written in simple language that is more likely to be understood by the intended audience. Documents and information should be available in different languages and formats if requested.

Good consultation documents should either contain or be accompanied by the following:

• a consultation calendar that makes clear to all parties the processes and overall timetable, and highlights relevant deadlines for responses and feedback;
• the name, address and, wherever possible the telephone number and e-mail address of a person who can be contacted for further information;
• a front sheet summary with:
• the purpose of the consultation and how it will be carried out
• a description of the issues, proposal or problem under consideration;
• the issues on which views are being sought should be fairly presented and provide clear questions to answer, as well as inviting other additional comments;
• an explanation of who has responsibility for the final decision or outcome and what is open for change;
• relevant background information;
• where appropriate, an explanation of who is likely to be affected, and how, including an assessment or impact statement covering the likely effect of the proposals on the community;
  
• where appropriate, an invitation to respondents to submit their own ideas or assessment of how the proposals will impact on the community;
  
• a list of those being consulted - this document may also ask consultees to suggest any organisations or individuals who should also be consulted;
• a request that those responding explain who they are, who they represent, who they have further consulted with and how those views have been reported back fairly and accurately;
• an evaluation form on which to feedback comments on the consultation itself and suggest improvements that could be made in the future.

After the consultation, the results should be carefully analysed ensuring that the views of small groups or groupings of residents are not overlooked. Particular attention should be paid to the views of those most affected by the proposals.

Once a decision is made on the way forward, respondents should be notified promptly. An explanation of the consultation process and how the decision reflects the views expressed should be summarised. A list of those who responded could be included.

Some respondents will inevitably wish to question why their views have been rejected and ask for a full explanation.

An effective evaluation process will reveal what worked, what did not and why. The question ‘What should be done differently next time?’ should be answered. Some other points should be considered:

• Were clear objectives set in the first place?
• Was  the expected level of response received from underrepresented or socially excluded groups?
• Can it be domonstrated which methods achieved success and which did not?
• Was the timetable realistic and achieved?
• Were sufficient resources, both monetary and human, allocated? Was the information easy to access, relevant and available in alternative formats?
• Has anything changed as a result of the consultation?