Design to create trust
Summary
When designing a public dialogue process, we need to consider both the institutional and collective dimensions in order for the dialogue to lead to sustainable results
The challenge
How do you design dialogue that will contribute to increased trust between the different actors regardless of their power and prior history?
The problem
Dialogue can contribute to improving the relationship and trust between citizens and the authorities (or those in power in a given situation and those who are not). While this may be true, authorities often emphasise unilateral relationships with civil society actors (vertically). The relationship between the actors (horizontally) is often regarded as secondary or unimportant. If we are aiming toward a collective approach to resolving problems, we need, in addition to collaboration between authorities and citizens, to consider the ability of the citizens to collaborate with each other. The consciousness of both the horizontal and vertical aspects of designing a process is required. How do you design such a process?
Design element
Think 360 degrees. Include both the authority structure and the horizontal in your planning. This means considering all concerned actors in the process. When preparing for the dialogue, consider how both the authority and the citizens describe the problem that needs to be addressed. Be open to the necessity for dialogue within organisations and between citizens. Listen in 360 degrees – this includes politicians, civil servants, other public institutions, societies, networks and individual citizens. How do they describe the problem? Who do they need or wish to speak to about it? These questions will help you to design the dialogue in a meaningful way. There may be a need for conversations on a horizontal level, in smaller homogenous groups, before all the actors meet together. It may be necessary to clear up differences between actors (horizontally) before an inclusive dialogue takes place. Sometimes this need arises even when the dialogue is underway.
Consider this example: The local authority wants to address security and safety and has identified certain problem areas and problem groups. Their approach is that they need to have a dialogue with these groups in order to resolve the problems they have identified. Your design, however, provides for an inventory phase consisting of individual interviews with all concerned actors. During this process, you hear from certain citizen groups that they will not participate if the far right is present. Others tell you that the authorities and the police are the real problem. When you ask who they might need to speak to, the youth tell you that they have a problem with the way in which the police seem to have a repressive and a relational approach at the same time and that this destroys trust in them. Some politicians maintain that the groups they have identified need to “be convinced that they need to change or face severe consequences”. Other politicians and officials disagree with this approach. Having listened to all of these, you realise that there is no agreement on what the problem is and that a number of conversations and even negotiation may be needed before a meaningful dialogue is possible.
Your mandate needs to include designing the dialogue from the views that are gathered in the planning phase. The form of the dialogue cannot be dictated by one sector of the circle only.
In some dialogue processes, it has been necessary to have a conversation about a) whether dialogue is possible and b) what form it should take in order to ensure the participation of everybody who needs to be part of it. This involves conversations on both the “horizontal” and “vertical” dimensions of trust.
Linked patterns