COMMON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT APPROACHES

Public Meetings
Large scale meeting open to the public or representatives of different stakeholder groups.
Particularly useful for dissemination of information, the sharing of opinions, and the
discussion of non-controversial issues.
Key things to consider
• Can be facilitated by the company or by a third party. Can be hosted by the company or in
partnership with other organisations. Involvement of other organisations that stakeholders
already know or trust can help to attract participants and put them at ease.
• Process needs to be designed to meet the aims of the organisation, concerns of the
stakeholders and the nature of the issue. Traditional public hearings can encourage
a ‘them and us feeling’ and don’t necessarily promote constructive discussion. They
are not really suitable for decision making, nor do they allow for a deeper dialogue.
Other options include workshop sessions, role play, consensus building sessions,
samoan circles, world café, design charettes, open space technology.
• Best suited for localised impacts and decisions such as specifi c planning issues, or
site level environmental impacts, where stakeholders are concentrated in a
geographic area.
Examples in action
• Swedish ICT companies Telia, Ericsson and AP Fastigheghter used the innovative
‘World Café’ method to facilitate discussion about the sustainable future of the industry
with corporate CEOs, public offi cials and NGO leaders.
Surveys
Mass surveys of whole stakeholder groups (e.g. all employees) or of a representative sample
(e.g. consumers), and can focus on general or specifi c issues. Can be conducted online, by
post, using computer terminals, by telephone or in-person.
Key things to consider
• Can be simple or complex, formal or informal. However, it can quickly get expensive
and data heavy, be clear about how you are going to use the results before the technique
is deployed.
• If well designed and sampled it can provide statistically valid overview of stakeholder
attitudes and opinions, and it avoids the ‘tyranny of the enthusiast’ problem of engaging
with self-selected stakeholders.
• Useful for gathering baseline or standardised information that can provide good guidance
for action. Given that it is ‘one-way’ communication, it does not directly contribute to
building trust or developing consensus.
• Findings and the companies response to them should be communicated back to the
surveyed stakeholders.
Examples in action
• Barclays plc commissioned a multi-stakeholder survey to obtain feedback on its corporate
social responsibility report and the CSR strategy represented therein. Various experts,
NGO representatives, media, community and government representatives were
systematically interviewed on their perception of the report and Barclays presented
performance and strategy. The results where then presented online, together with a
response from Barclays regarding the primary issues that stakeholders raised.
STAGE 4
Stakeholder Advisory or Assurance Panels
Stakeholders are invited by the company to offer advice and comments on a particular project
or ongoing set of issues, or to review corporate activities and provide independent assurance.
Key things to consider
• Be clear about what capacity advisory panel members are acting in:

• Where stakeholders provide their advice and insights as individuals, not as
  representatives of their organisations or constituencies, this normally makes agreement
  of terms of references easier.
• Where panel members are representing a group, be sure they are representative
  (they may need to be elected) and have time and capacity to go back and consult their
  constituencies and ensure support.
  • Advisory panels may be made up of stakeholders from various groups, or with several
  individuals representing a single group of stakeholders.
  • Good for dealing with long-term and complex issues and processes as members are able to
  develop good understanding of issues facing the company.
  • Involves signifi cant time commitment from stakeholders/experts – they may need to
  be paid for their time as well as expenses, and this may have implications for perceived
  independence of stakeholders if not handled carefully.
  • Ensure good balance of sectors represented on the panel, and be cautious that if a
  particular organisation is not invited, could that undermine the whole process?
  Examples in action
  • The US based clothing retailer Nike has established a multi-stakeholder panel to advise
  during the development of their 2005 CSR report. Ziba Cranmer, Nike’s senior manager
  of stakeholder relations, says of this: “When you have superfi cial stakeholder engagement,
  you don’t challenge your assumptions. It is helpful/useful to have dialogue or negotiation
  between diverse stakeholders that changes perspectives, promotes learning and pushes
  the parties further in constructive ways.” When Nike disclosed a wealth of available details
  about its supply-chain, including labour and human rights abuses, there was enough trust
  between Nike and its stakeholders for the company to feel that any public statements
  made would be balanced. This allowed Nike to raise the corporate transparency
  benchmark.
  • The French cement company Lafarge has created an expert stakeholder panel that meets
  once annually with senior management and provides comments on the development of
  the company’s sustainability report. The engagement between the company and the panel
  is facilitated by an external consultancy. Comments from stakeholders are also published
  in the sustainability report.
  • The US-based IT company Intel has created Community Advisory Panels around
  its facilities in Ireland, Arizona, New Mexico and Oregon. The panels advise Intel
  staff on community issues. Members include representatives of local government, public
  safety, residents’ associations, schools, youth organisations, businesses, environmental
  organisations and interested residents. Each member serves a term of three years, except
  for four standing members from local government.
  • Camelot, the operator of the UK National Lottery, has established three permanent
  consultative and advisory bodies which play a key role in developing Camelot’s stakeholder
  engagement programme: The Advisory Panel for Social Responsibility, made up of
  individuals with professional expertise in stakeholder concerns reviews the Social
  Report and advises on strategies for continuous improvement. The Staff Consultative
  Forum is elected by staff and meets every three months to discuss all major policies
  affecting employees. The Retailer Forum represents National Lottery retail outlets and
  discusses issues such as policy developments within Camelot, challenges facing retailers,
  retailer selection and the role of retailers in preventing illegal and/or excessive play.
  THE PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | 105
  Engage with your stakeholders in ways that work
  COMMON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT APPROACHES
  Multi-stakeholder Forum
  One-off or ongoing dialogue between representatives of different stakeholder groups, focused
  around an issue of mutual concern, which may not necessarily be an individual companies’
  operations. Often convened or facilitated by an independent third-party.
  Key things to consider
  • Forum meetings can take a number of formats depending on need, for example: a one-off
  roundtable discussion about an issue with no commitment to do anything other than
  report on the meeting or a consensus building or participatory planning process.
  • Useful where issues are complex and cannot be addressed by an individual organisation
  acting alone.
  • There is often a tension between the aims of being an inclusive forum which welcomes
  new members, while at the same time managing to go beyond being a ‘talking shop’ to
  real action.
  Examples in action
  • The United Nations Global Compact is probably the most well known global multistakeholder
  forum to advance corporate citizenship. It engages over 2000 participating
  companies and related stakeholders through global and regional Policy Dialogues,
  Learning Forums and local level meetings of national Global Compact Networks. Policy
  dialogues are also open to newcomers, companies and organisations interested in joining
  the voluntary initiative. (see www.unglobalcompact.org)
  • MFA Forum: A working group including Nike, The Gap, AccountAbility, The World Bank,
  BSR and Oxfam came together to consider how apparel companies could responsibly
  respond to global shifts in the garment manufacturing market following the end of the
  ‘Multi-Fibre Arrangement’ quota system. Following an initial meeting, working sessions
  of the forum took the form of telephone conferences. As a fi rst step they worked together
  to compile a set of rapid research reports bringing together expert predictions, national
  competitiveness and social development data, buyer and labour activist perspectives.
  This enabled them to develop a framework for action in key countries.
  • Gap Inc. organised a range of stakeholder forums in Washington DC and London, to
  discuss supply-chain issues. NGOs, trade unions, multilateral organisations,
  campaigners, government representatives, etc., got together to explore potential ways
  of working together to enhance the welfare of workers in global supply chains, and to avoid
  labour rights violations.
  STAGE 4
  12 Offi ce of Consumer Affairs “Voluntary Codes: A Guide for their Development and Use”, Canada, 1998.
  Multi-stakeholder Alliances, Partnerships,Voluntary Initiatives, Joint Projects
  Companies and stakeholders from public, private and voluntary sectors taking action together
  through collaborative ventures or mutually agreed commitments. This may be a partnership
  between a single company and a stakeholder organisation, or a multi-way alliance including
  several participants.
  Voluntary initiatives involving both industry and governments have increased since the early
  1990s in an effort to improve sustainability performance. They often include both a variety of
  commitments by individual member companies to achieve environmental or social objectives
  that go beyond existing regulations, and which can also take the form of codes of conduct
  adopted at the national or international level by industrial sector associations, or agreements
  on performance targets between a government and a company, a group of companies or an
  industry sector. These agreements can then be complimented with specifi c agreements to
  take mutually supportive or joint actions towards broader goals.
  Key things to consider
  • Partnership initiatives designs need to take account of the costs and benefi ts for each
  of the participants – they may not share a common set of goals or values but they can work
  together to achieve specifi c shared objectives.
  • Many partnership initiatives start in an informal manner and are initiated or catalysed
  by a strong individual champion within one of the organisations, who might be acting as
  a partnership broker to bring organisations together. In the longer term, in order to become
  durable and embedded within the organisations involved, partnerships need to develop a
  more formal structure and governance process.
  • A partnership often grows to include more partners over time, as needed to achieve its
  objectives and meet the needs of stakeholders within a changing environment.
  • As partnerships become more focused and technical, for example voluntary initiatives to
  develop specifi c codes, they tend to become more formalised in both process and
  outcome. In the late 1990s a study by the Canadian Government 12 identifi ed the
  following eight steps for developing effective voluntary codes: 1. Gathering information;

1. Preliminary discussions with major stakeholders; 3. Create a working group;
2. Preliminary draft of the code; 5. Consultations on Preliminary draft; 6. Publication and
   dissemination of the Code; 7. Implementation; 8. Review.
   THE PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | 107
   Engage with your stakeholders in ways that work
   13 Finance Initiative http://unepfi .net/, Tour Operators Initiative for Sustainable Tourism
   Development http://www.toinitiative.org, Global e-Sustainability Initiative www.gesi.
   org, Mobility Forum http://www.uneptie.org/outreach/vi/initiatives.htm#automotives,
   Advertising and Communication Forum http://www.uneptie.org/pc/sustain/advertising/
   advertising.htm, Sustainable Building and Construction Forum http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/
   sbc/index.asp
   14 See the Seed website for examples of the emerging partnerships in all regions, with support
   services and partnership brokering provided to help business and social entrepreneurs to jointly
   set up new partnerships: www.seedinit.org
   COMMON STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT APPROACHES
   Multi-stakeholder Alliances, Partnerships,Voluntary Initiatives, Joint Projects
   (continued)
   Examples in action
   • The Union Bank of California established a partnership with not-for-profi t economic
   empowerment organisation Operation Hope in 1996, in order to understand the needs
   of consumers in poor areas and develop savings and mortgage products for low-income
   populations. The two organisations collaborated in opening check cashing and banking
   facilities in poor areas and developing a programme of fi nancial education.
   • The Ethical Trading Initiative is a partnership of food and clothing retail companies,
   development NGOs and trades unions. It has developed a ‘base code’ of labour
   standards in the supply chains of member companies and has on an ongoing programme
   of collaboration to develop, pilot and promote robust methodologies for monitoring
   compliance and impacts.
   • Since the early 1990s a number of international voluntary initiatives for different industry
   sectors have been created between UNEP and industry. The participating companies
   pool resources in developing and advancing environmentally sound practices. This
   includes work programmes with research projects that address issues on the global
   agenda faced by all industry members. Companies also use these platforms to engage
   with related stakeholder organisations. In each initiative participants commit themselves
   to a set of principles under the umbrella of sustainable development. Companies also use
   these initiatives to work with stakeholders in developing sector specifi c supplements to
   the GRI Guidelines on sustainability reporting 13.
   • In the environmental fi eld, various industry associations have been involved in the creation
   of international voluntary codes and guidelines. These include for example the
   International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), International Council of Chemicals
   Associations (ICCA), the International Council on Metals and Mining, and the World Travel
   and Tourism Council (WTTC).
   • The Seed Initiative of the IUCN – the World Conversation Union, UNEP and UNDP, is
   supporting the development of multistakeholder, local partnerships to advance the goals
   of the 2000 Millenium Declaration (the so-called MDGs) and the 2002 Johannesburg
   Plan of Implementation 14.
   • For further examples of partnerships, see also “Vol. 1: The Guide to Practitioners’
   Perspectives on Stakeholder Engagement” (Fig. 2.5, p.25)
   STAGE 4
   Name
   Common Facilitation Techniques
   Identity and leverage
   resources and positive
   experiences which have
   contributed to success
   in the past.
   Purpose Description
   Appreciative inquiry used in stakeholder engagement seeks to identify “what works” through inviting participants
   to recount individual success stories regarding the relationship between a corporation and its stakeholders.
   These stories serve to inspire a more positive approach to the relationship, and more creativity. Once discovered,
   these stories are shared throughout the organisation. What is “wrong”, “inadequate” and/or “not good enough”
   moves out of awareness as the organisation taps into positive possibilities rather than past failings.
   Appreciate inquiry is based on the idea that a positive future can be built on the successes of the past.
   With the assistance of an unbiased mediator or facilitator, participants are guided through a structured process
   of raising issues, understanding each other’s views, and then cooperatively developing an agreed upon
   resolution. A short guide to consensus building: http://web.mit.edu/publicdisputes/practice/cbh_ch1.html
   A panel of stakeholders is brought together and asked to investigate a particular question. The panel selects
   and then publicly cross-examines experts and produces a report of its fi ndings. Most often used in relation to
   questions relating to new science or technology.
   Break down into small groups to discuss clearly articulated question. Note ideas on 5-8 cards per group. Cards
   grouped into logical categories and displayed on wall. Groups can prioritise ideas using voting with paper dots.
   Ideas are shared with larger group in a ‘marketplace’ display.
   In Open Space meetings, events and organisations, participants create and manage their own agenda of parallel
   working sessions around a central theme of strategic importance. Open Space conferences therefore have no
   keynote speakers, no pre-announced schedules or workshops and no panel discussions. Instead, sitting in a
   large circle, participants learn in the fi rst hour how they are going to create their own conference. Anyone who
   wants to initiate a discussion or activity, writes it down on a large sheet of paper in big letters and then stands up
   and announces it to the group. After selecting one of the many pre-established times and places, they post their
   proposed workshop on a wall. When everyone who wants to has announced and posted their initial offerings,
   participants mill around the wall, putting together their personal schedules for the remainder of the conference.
   The fi rst meetings begin immediately.
   Planning for Real is a process trademarked by the Neighbourhood Initiatives Foundation
   (www.nifonline.org.uk ). The process uses large-scale maps and three-dimensional models to promote
   discussion of planning and community development options.
   A small panel of stakeholders including decision makers and experts are guided by a facilitator to identify key
   issues relevant to the issue under discussion. From this key trends and driving force are determined. The most
   important possible trends are then fl eshed out into contingent futures.
   In a visioning process individuals and groups develop a vision for the future. Having developed the vision they
   then go through a process of ‘back casting’ to translate the vision into more concrete goals and action plans.
   Seat people at tables of 4 or 5 set up informally in a café style. Each table is hosted by one person who stays
   there. Each table discusses a related question linked to the overall theme, drawing and writing on the tablecloth
   to record ideas. After 30 minutes people move to a new table and are encouraged to link and carry over ideas
   from one conversation to the next.
   The table below outlines, very briefl y, some of the facilitation techniques that can be used in small or large group meetings. In most cases
   you would need an experienced facilitator to guide the process.