Leadership Challenge 3: Engagement
Integrate citizen and other forms of engagement (planned and spontaneous, including social media) with traditional local government
structures and processes.
Other Information:
Collaborative engagement, the focus of the third leadership challenge, is a mechanism that can be employed to coordinate disparate
structures of authority, turning them into working networks. While this leadership challenge complements the second challenge,
it should not be confused with it; the second challenge focuses on the importance of structure when working within a networked
environment, while the third challenge's focus is collaborative engagement as a process... Put into the context of bridging
the gap, the issue with citizen engagement, whether electronic or in person, is how the communication transaction affects
either political acceptability or administrative sustainability. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, is the question
of whether the engagement serves as a bridge between the two.
Stakeholder(s):
- Citizens
- Social Media
- Jurisdictions: Whether within a single jurisdiction or a network of independent structures of authority, one of the challenges associated
with engagement is finding ways to successfully merge multiple sources of information and communication with traditional governing
structures and processes (Bryer 2009; Cooper, Bryer, and Meek 2006; Fagotto and Fung 2009; Leighninger 2006).
- Independent Authority Networks
- Citizens: Because citizens are also stakeholders, we believe that if engagement is not integrated with the processes of government institutions,
the expressions of desired outcomes will not be weighed against a full array of public values.
- Government Institutions
- Governing Bodies: For example, governing bodies must engage the conflicts among values such as representation, efficiency, social equity, and
individual rights (Nalbandian 2006) -- all fundamental democratic values.
- Advocates: Advocates, whether expressing their views in person or electronically, do not have the same obligations. The challenge is
how to connect the issue-specific and passionate views of advocates, or the players in a network context in which there are
different missions, motivations, and identities, with the totality of democratic value considerations.
- Mary Furtado: Mary Furtado, assistant manager in Catawba County, North Carolina, described this challenge: "The communication dilemma manifests
itself in both extremes: comments/feedback that is so niche-specific that it belies a narrow view of government versus feedback
that is so general in expression containing broad citizen sentiments and ungrounded in specifics as to not be useful for much
at all. Then there is the problem that the confluence of input coming at government leaders may dilute its impact due to sheer
volume. If the stream of citizen input is constant, it can become overwhelming and therefore easier to tune out some or all
of it" (e-mail correspondence, March 6, 2012).
- Catawba County, North Carolina
- Social Media: Social media highlights this challenge. Its popularity provides new opportunities for local governments to engage its citizens,
but it also poses significant challenges.
- Olathe Leadership Team: At an early juncture, we asked the Olathe leadership team about difficulties in producing valid and relevant information,
given the prevalence of social media and other accessible information sources. The fact that the city's leadership team includes
a communication and engagement manager indicates the central importance that Olathe places on navigating this challenge, especially
as it links to the organization's emphasis on performance management.
- Tim Danneberg: Tim Danneberg, the communication and engagement manager, pointed to the ease with which people can compile a breadth and depth
of information on a topic today via the Internet; the validity and quality of the information, however, is another matter,
and one that the city must address: In an era that prides itself on data-driven decisions, much of the information available
via the Internet is instead opinion, perception, rhetoric and supposition rather than hard, factual data. ... Everyone has
an opinion and the opinions have been amplified in their velocity, intensity and frequency by the Internet.
- Politicians: Politicians and other decision makers can now continuously and instantaneously consume mass quantities of information that
strengthen and often morph an array of opinions.
- Decision Makers
- Olathe, KS: Olathe's performance measurement initiatives serve well in meeting this challenge. To combat the overload of available information,
factual data must be continually collected, analyzed and reported. ... Data must be provided not only to those that make the
decisions but also to those who may try to influence decision makers. The provision of quality, relevant data may diminish
the desire to search for answers on an Internet overloaded with information and opinions. (e-mail correspondence, September
11, 2011)
Objective(s):
|
