Share this page Print
​​​​​​
​​

Strategy

Building an integrated engagement plan to meet the engagement objectives required utilizing complementary techniques and tactics that could be implemented simultaneously. In this way each of the engagement objectives could be met within the time frame for engagement and any limitations imposed by a singular engagement technique could be balanced by the use of another.

While no single engagement tactic used in the engagement plan could meet all of the Council directed objectives, together the integrated results of the four engagement streams provides a comprehensive understanding of citizen and stakeholder perspectives and priorities for City Council and staff to consider as they develop the City’s four-year road map for 2015-18.

Methods of Input

Activity-based methods of input reduced the need for subject matter expertise by embedding subject complexities into the structure of the activity. Content in the activities provided something for participants to respond to which increases the clarity of input. Activity-based engagement methods constrained input to within the limitations of the activity. Input methods of this type employed in Action Plan engagement included:

  • Online City Priorities Tool
  • In-Person City Priorities Dotmocracy
  • Online Budget Simulator

Discussion-based methods of input generated context for the input collected and contributed to transparency by encouraging participant-to-participant interactions. Discussion-based methods did not address subject-specific education nor limit input from going off-topic. Input methods of this type employed in the Action Plan 2015-2018 engagement included:

  • Online City Talk Discussion Tool
  • In-person Sticky Note Discussion Boards
  • Online Open-ended comments in both Budget Simulator & City Priorities Tool
  • Citizen Ideation
  • Social Agency & Business Focus Groups
  • Civic Partner Ideation
  • City Staff Fluid Survey

Self-selected participation methods of input were characterized by the self-selection of participants and by reduced barriers to participation. These methods contributed to the inclusivity of the engagement process and provided the broadest reach and awareness of opportunities for input and the greatest opportunity for subject matter education. Input methods of this type included:

  • Online Budget Simulator
  • Online City Priorities Tool
  • In-person City Priorities Dotmocracy
  • In-person City Priorities Card
  • Online City Talk Discussion Forum
  • In-person Sticky-note Discussion Boards
  • City Staff Fluid Survey

Recruited participation methods of input were characterized by the recruitment of participants to represent a wide array of views and opinions, in addition to key socio-demographic variables. These methods contributed a balance of perspectives, as well as allowed for exploration of participant perspectives in more depth than possible in the Inclusive engagement stream. Recruiting participants limited the ability to broadly increase awareness or education on the subject matter. Input methods of this type included:

  • Citizen Ideation
  • Social Agency & Business Focus Groups
  • Civic Partner Ideation