IDENTIFYING THE MOST EFFECTIVE ENGAGEMENT METHODS

BACKGROUND
The tools and methods of stakeholder engagement include processes already
familiar to business such as market research surveys and focus groups, opinion
leader research, conferences and workshops. Other, less familiar participation
processes and facilitation techniques may also be useful; tools and techniques
developed by practitioners in international development, public planning,
democratic participation and online communities can be especially helpful in
consensus building and problem solving with diverse groups of stakeholders.
Th ere are a wide range of methods and tools available, each with advantages and
limitations. Getting it right depends on picking the right combination of approaches
and techniques for your particular situation, business and stakeholders. Th ere is no
single formula for making this selection; in each case it will depend on a number
of factors which have already been analysed in previous stages, for example:
• Your strategic engagement objectives
• Th e current approach to and level of engagement with your stakeholders
• Th e maturity of the issue
• Your and your stakeholders’ expectations regarding the outcomes of the engagement
• Available resources to undertake engagements
• Th e magnitude of change that you are seeking and your margins of movement
In many cases, combinations or sequences of diff erent approaches may be necessary
for achieving your objectives. For example, conducting focus groups may be an
excellent way of gaining initial insights into stakeholders’ perspectives on an issue.
Th ese insights could then be the starting point for developing a voluntary initiative
with some industry peers to address the issue. When you are establishing such a
voluntary initiative, you should then also make sure that relevant stakeholders who
will be aff ected by it are informed in some way. Focus groups for the initial exploration
of an issue are also an excellent way of preparing the design of a tailor made survey,
for example to examine employee perspectives on internal management practices.
1 See also the complementary Figure 1.3 in Volume 1: “The Guide to Practitioners’ Perspectives on Stakeholder Engagement”, p. 14
THE PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | 97
SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY M14: IDENTIFYING THE MOST
SUITABLE METHODS FOR ENGAGEMENT
Th e purpose of this activity is to identify the most suitable methods for engagement to
meet your and your stakeholders’ needs.
Building on the information gained in the previous stages, the following process
helps you to select the approach, or the combination of approaches, that you
should consider more closely. It provides suggestions on which techniques are
likely to work best in each case, as well as some tips and considerations for specifi c
situations.
Stakeholder engagement can range from a hands-off and marginal approach
to a fully integrated part of decision making. Table 4.1 identifi es eight levels of
engagement going up this ladder (see p60, Stage 2 for further discussion). Th e
table highlights the key characteristics of the diff erent levels of engagement, and
gives examples of some of the most common practical engagement approaches
at each level. Th e accompanying spreadsheet downloadable on the website www.
accountability.org.uk, summarises the specifi c characteristics of each approach
and their suitability to diff erent engagement situations.
• Convene a group of people who know these stakeholder groups, people that
already interact with them, and/or were involved in conducting previous
analysis of the issues and stakeholders. It is also advisable to integrate the
stakeholders themselves into at least the fi nal design of the approach, to make
sure that it meets their expectations. You should also allow for some fl exibility
in any approach that you may be planning.
• Review the outputs from previous stages, your fi ndings on what others
have done, and templates 7-9. Template 9 gives a summary overview of the
stakeholders that you could engage with on specifi c issues, where you are now
and where you would like to go.
• Consider whether you need to engage with these stakeholder groups
separately (because of diff erent needs and practicalities or diff erent objectives
and relationships between stakeholders) or whether you could involve them
in the same engagement process (particularly where you have the same
objectives in relation to diff erent stakeholder groups, or where you want to
resolve confl ict between them).
• For each issue and group of stakeholders consider the business’ preferred level
of engagement, and the specifi c engagement approaches that are likely to be
most appropriate to these levels of engagement. Use the descriptions of these
specifi c approaches on the following pages to consider these further.
P14: IDENTIFYING THE MOST EFFECTIVE ENGAGEMENT METHODS
Engage with your stakeholders in ways that work
STAGE 4
• Use the table, as well as the questions in the table below to refl ect on a small
number of specifi c approaches that are suitable. Th e Levels of Engagement
table, downloadable from www.accountability.org.uk also helps you to
consider their suitability. Remember that all approaches are fl exible and
adaptable. Often you will fi nd that you need several approaches, and especially
high-level ones are often preceded or accompanied by more low-level
approaches such as surveys or one-on-one meetings to prepare, collect some
basic information or ensure that there are some fundamental agreements on
important aspects.
• Once you have selected an approach, discuss again the possible outcomes of it,
and if this is what your business wants and is ready to deal with. Finally,
double check any decision on approaches with your original strategic
engagement objectives, to ensure that they do contribute to reaching them.
Questions for Assessing Engagement Methods

1. Does it help us to establish the kind of relationship that we want?
2. Can it generate the short- and / or long-term outputs we need to reach our
   strategic objectives?
3. Will it generate the qualitative or quantitative information that the business needs
   for making its decisions?
4. Do I have suffi cient resources and time for applying this method / mix of methods?
   Organisational
   and Stakeholders’
   Objectives and Needs
   Stakeholder Profi les 5. Does it work for the stakeholders that I want to engage with?
5. Considering the stakeholders’ mobility, is it suitable for their current location?
6. Does it suit the stakeholders’ current level of awareness and understanding?
7. What practical issues need to be considered and addressed in order to make the
   engagement accessible/attractive to them (see also Stage 3)?
   Relationship Context 9. Do we currently have a relationship with these stakeholders that makes this
   approach applicable?
8. Have we known the stakeholders long enough?
9. Is it suitable for the number of people we need to deal with?
   Issue Context 12. Is it appropriate for the level of maturity of the issue?
10. Is the issue maybe too sensitive for this approach?
11. Does it match with existing policy or legislative requirements that apply to the
    stakeholder group or issue?
12. If the issue requires multi-stakeholder involvement, does this approach work for it?
    THE PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | 99
    Inviting Written Responses from Stakeholder / Reply Slips
    Invite written responses to formal consultations or ongoing response slips to enable
    stakeholders receiving issue briefi ngs or sustainability reports to provide feedback.
    Key things to consider
    • Generally low response rates, but provides an open mechanism for individual
    stakeholders to easily have their say without having to attend meetings.
    • Helps to build mailing list of interested stakeholders for further engagement.
    • Does not generate statistically valid result – can easily be skewed.
    Examples in action
    • Shell invites the general public to “Tell Shell” any questions, comments or opinions
    through tear off postcards in its sustainability report, letters or email. They commit to
    reply personally to all comments or questions received in this way.
    Telephone Hotlines
    Freephone hotlines for individual stakeholders to obtain information about an issue or
    project, to give feedback or to report problems.
    Key things to consider
    • Telephone communication is accessible to many people and enables individual
    stakeholders to respond with minimum effort and at a time and place convenient
    for them.
    • Does not allow for in-depth dialogue, but does allow for stakeholders to obtain
    information or respond rapidly, and to do this in confi dence or anonymously
    if necessary.
    • Telephone hotlines can be answered in-house by a corporate ombudsman,
    compliance offi cer, lawyer or trained administrator. In-house hotlines are able to
    respond to calls quickly and to give appropriate advice and feedback to callers.
    However, stakeholders may not feel comfortable reporting sensitive issues.
    • Independent outsiders can handle hotline calls on behalf of an organisation.
    They are less able to give feedback, but can be more credible and approachable to
    stakeholders, and can also be integrated into an assurance process.
    Some of the most common stakeholder engagement approaches are outlined below,
    followed by an introduction to some of the interactive techniques and methods that
    can be used in small and larger group meetings. Th e following engagement
    approaches are described:
    • Inviting written responses from stakeholders, e.g. via reply slips in reports
    • Telephone hotlines
    • One-to-one meetings
    • Online engagement mechanisms
    • Involvement of stakeholders into the investigation of issues, reporting and
    policy development
    • Focus groups
    • Public-meetings
    • Surveys
    • Stakeholder advisory or assurance panels
    • Multi-stakeholder forums
    • Multi-stakeholder alliances, partnerships, voluntary initiatives and joint-projects
    • Overview of common facilitation techniques
    Engage with your stakeholders in ways that work
    COMMON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT APPROACHES
    STAGE 4
    One-to-One Meetings
    Individual Meetings with stakeholders, opinion leaders or organisational representatives.
    Key things to consider
    • One-to-one meetings are often the fi rst step in engaging with a particular stakeholder
    or group. They can be used for information gathering, exploring issues, getting
    feedback on how the company is viewed, ‘testing the water’, agreeing shared
    objectives or ground rules and building trust with key stakeholders before going on
    with wider stakeholder engagement.
    • One-to-one meetings provide a ‘safe’ space where stakeholders can discuss concerns
    without having to take or defend a public position.
    • Individual meetings are rarely considered or reported on as part of corporate
    stakeholder engagement programmes, but day-to-day individual meetings with
    key stakeholders including investors (including ‘responsible investment’ funds),
    institutional customers, regulators, politicians and offi cials and strategic suppliers
    are one of the most important ways in which expectations and issues are discussed).
    Examples in action
    • Telefónica regularly meets investors and analysts who have adopted socially and
    environmentally responsible investment criteria to discuss performance, risks as
    well as the strategic signifi cance of Telefónica’s corporate responsibility efforts.
    The company’s participation in the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), which provides
    a secretariat for the world’s largest institutional investor collaboration on the
    business implications of climate change, is one outcome of these one-on-one
    meetings.
    Telephone Hotlines (continued)
    Freephone hotlines for individual stakeholders to obtain information about an issue or
    project, to give feedback or to report problems. (continued)
    Examples in action
    • Telephone hotlines are widely used by US companies as part of their ethics
    compliance programmes, response to Federal Sentencing Guidelines requirements
    – to allow employees to ‘blow the whistle’ on instances of fraud or unethical behaviour.
    • Telephone hotlines have also been used in supply chain labour standards compliance
    programmes to allow local employees to report labour standards violations to a
    trusted third party intermediary.
    • HP tracks consumer feedback about global citizenship issues that it receives via
    its customer support hotlines. They receive several hundred customer enquiries each
    month on issues such as product recycling, environmental specifi cations, packaging
    and human rights. As well as responding to individual queries the company collates
    reports on overall levels of concern to better understand customer priorities and the
    importance of environmental and social issues in the marketplace.
    THE PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | 101
    COMMON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT APPROACHES
    Online Engagement Mechanisms
    Web or email based feedback or discussion facilities
    Key things to consider
    • Provided that your stakeholders have access to the required technology, online
    engagement mechanisms reach across distance and enable stakeholders to
    participate without attending meetings. However, it is important to consider who
    will and who will not meet the technical requirements. Particularly when engaging
    with communities in developing countries, online mechanisms are extremely
    unlikely to allow for the integration of disadvantaged communities. In general,
    internet/online users are higher educated and wealthier than the ‘average’
    representative in society.
    • Generally not statistically valid results – can be diffi cult to interpret volume
    of responses – internet based dialogue does not tend to be very good at reaching
    consensus.
    • Design of online engagement mechanism important in relation to organisational
    and stakeholder needs. Options include: multi-way web based discussion/bulletin
    board – can be ongoing or time limited, web forms for one way feedback, email
    discussions, real-time question and answer sessions (can be linked into
    simultaneous real world events), wikis (collaborative writing programmes), chat
    rooms as online focus groups, web based surveys or polls.
    Examples in action
    • Microsoft has set up a range of online technical communities to provide
    opportunities for users to interact with Microsoft employees, experts, and each
    other in order to discuss Microsoft products and technologies. Engagement
    options include newsgroups, chats, user groups and webcasts of conferences.
    Most recently they have introduced informal blogs by Microsoft employees
    including critical ‘celebrity blogger’ Robert Scoble.
    • Shell was one of the fi rst corporations to develop online stakeholder engagement.
    It has a web-based “Tell Shell” forum for people to discuss any issues relevant to
    Shell. The site started as a discussion forum for stakeholders to feedback on topics
    covered by the annual Shell Reports, however it has now been redesigned into a
    more general discussion forum with regularly refreshed discussion threads. It has
    been criticised for censorship and for the redesign which takes the focus away from
    Shell’s own performance and towards more general energy industry issues. A
    number of alternative activist maintained sites and discussions have been set up.
    Engage with your stakeholders in ways that work
    STAGE 4
    Involving Stakeholders in Investigating Issues, Drafting Reports and Policies.
    Stakeholder groups or experts from outside traditional business spheres are
    commissioned to write reports or commentaries on key issues or to comment on
    drafts prepared internally. Multi-stakeholder groups comprising internal and external
    stakeholders may work together to develop a report or policy.
    Key things to consider
    • Involves signifi cant time commitment for stakeholders/experts – may need to be
    paid, but this will have implications for perceived independence of stakeholders.
    • Transparency about the research procedures is important for many stakeholders, therefore
    this involvement of stakeholders needs to be refl ected in reporting processes.
    • Limited to engagement with professional stakeholders.
    • Need to ensure a purpose for the report and a way to translate it into action – output
    cannot just be on paper.
    Examples in action
    • BT commissioned a number of experts to write challenging commentaries on ‘hot topics’
    such as the digital divide which were published, along with a response from the company,
    as part of its sustainability report.
    • The Global Reporting Initiative secretariat in Amsterdam asked some 30 stakeholders
    ranging from staff, to broader networks to provide detailed written or telephone
    comments on their draft sustainability report leading to signifi cant changes both to the
    report presentation and the organisations commitments to action.
    • Telecommunications companies participating in the Global e-Sustainability Initiative with
    UNEP and the International Telecommunication Union sponsored the NGO Fauna & Flora
    International to do an extensive report on “Coltan Mining in the Democratic Republic of
    the Congo”. The report gave valuable insights on the ethical and conservation issues
    involved, interviewing and setting out key stakeholders in the long tantalum industry
    supply and user chain.
    Focus Group
    Small group meeting to elicit feedback on a particular issue. Company representatives
    are usually present but group is facilitated or monitored by a third party.
    Key things to consider
    • Effective and fl exible means to obtain feedback on the companies handling of
    diverse issues or to learn about the breadth of stakeholders’ viewpoints. However,
    the views obtained from a focus group can deviate from the broader population of
    stakeholders, as the number of people involved in a focus group cannot be
    considered as a representative sample. This makes the careful selection of
    representatives even more important.
    Examples in action
    • Telefónica, after initial research on stakeholders views, opinions and expectations,
    regularly conducts focus groups with stakeholders to test their fi ndings and to verify
    their researcher’s results.
    • South Africa’s Nedbank, when reconsidering its sustainability strategy, hosted
    a stakeholder feedback workshop with a small and diverse group of stakeholder
    representatives. People with expertise in sustainability were chosen, but also
    analysts, NGOs, investors, customers and suppliers. Using the annual sustainability
    report as a starting point, its group strategy as well as a performance update were
    presented and subsequently discussed.