Illustration by Orquídea Campbell-Espinoza. Learn more about our illustrators.
Utilizing and Aligning Stakeholder Tables through a Design Process
Whether we’re working on a planning project, a new program design, a digital tool, or something else, much of our work involves bringing together stakeholders to make decisions about what should happen next. These stakeholders include community members, people from various sectors of business, elders, historians, and the people who will be implementing the solution in the end. Our friends at the Institute of Equitable Design and Justice talk about these as Tables of Collaboration™ in their Equity-Centered Community Design (ECCD)™ guide. In each of our projects, these tables are built into the process, giving their feedback, input, and sometimes making the decisions. There’s lots of different types of tables that could be brought together, each with different advantages and potential contributions to the process. Consider some of these options for your next design effort!
Utilizing an existing table
An existing table, such as a standing advisory committee or other group, already knows a lot about the topic at hand, and often has the existing motivation and enthusiasm to be part of the process. Plus, they probably already have meetings scheduled and norms for working together.
- Best for: Deep expertise and buy-in. Involving an existing table can bring long-standing wisdom from organizations or past practices, and can also help have the most involved people even more bought in to the next steps.
- Managing invitations: Setting clear expectations and making room for other business. Since this type of group often already has regular meetings, it’s important to share any changes to existing expectations or norms that this new process might bring. Throughout the collaborative, design-led part of the process, the group may have other business they have to take care of as well. Schedule time sharing during meetings, or alternative dates, to ensure that both new and ongoing work can be completed.
- Process for trust-building: Ensuring clear expectations about decision-making and showing follow-through. With a group like this, make it clear who makes the final decision, when that happens, and how execution will happen. Often these expectations will follow similar trajectories to other work this standing group is involved with, but especially if anything differs make sure that is clear from the start.
- Challenges with this structure: Constraints of time, and not having all the needed expertise. While using an existing group can save time in scheduling and relationship building, it can also mean that you’re asking more of your most committed people already. They may not have time or attention on top of their other responsibilities. In addition, a standing group may have been designed to respond to what’s currently happening, rather than what’s coming next. This may require supplementing with other stakeholders to be sure all perspectives are represented.
- Example: Supporting the Resilience of Youngish Adults in the Jewish Community. In this effort with the Jewish Federation of St. Louis, we worked with an existing group of lay leaders that had been convened to respond to findings about mental health in the community. Our work together focused on community members within a certain age range, and this group participated in three collaborative workshops to develop and identify ideas that could help positively impact their well-being. The work of this group was supplemented by targeted interviews with others who had wisdom from their own experiences.
Creating a new table specifically for a project or effort
Forming a new table that is meant to support a specific project or effort can help deepen relationships, make important decisions, and add feedback into a process. This type of group can also help build trust within or across organizations and entities that may not have a lot of existing trust.
- Best for: Deepening relationships and trust, while gathering targeted and specific input and decision-making. A new table, formed specifically to advise a design effort, can be curated to ensure there’s diverse representation and perspectives across an issue area or topic. This group can also be a way to help a small number of people have direct buy-in and influence over a process that might impact them or their future work, giving them more trust and insight into the process.
- Managing invitations: Set clear expectations, offer a warm welcome, and build on existing relationships. Whether you form this new group by invitation or by application, it’s important to have worked out expectations like time commitment, meeting locations, decision-making capacity, and more in advance so people can assess their ability to be involved. Often, these tables are created based on existing relationships, with partners reaching out for a warm welcome. If that’s not possible (such as with an open, public application process), then consider personalized phone calls or onboarding sessions once the group is formed, to build relationships and connections.
- Process for trust-building: Be responsive to questions and concerns, and allow flexibility in the process to respond to what comes up. Often, this new table will raise new perspectives or views on a topic that haven’t come up before. They may be well-positioned to question or challenge the process. It’s important to have enough flexibility in your process (and mindset!) to respond to any concerns, and adjust based on feedback from this group.
- Challenges with this structure: Having different levels of expertise, and maintaining commitment over the length of the project with competing needs. At this table, people may be entering with very different levels of understanding and expertise in the topic. Some may be there because they’re deeply familiar with the technical details, while others may have relevant lived experience or perspectives. This can be valuable to bring people with different perspectives together, but it’s important that onboarding brings everyone to the table with a shared foundation and clear sense of the value of their role so participation can flow smoothly. In addition, creating a new table can mean competing with other commitments, over potentially many months. Be sure to design the process so that people are able to participate, even if they can’t make a meeting.
- Example: Infrastructure for Aging Services. The Design Team for this project was assembled by the Senior Fund and Marillac Mission Fund teams, drawing from a variety of stakeholders in the aging services space. Each member was personally invited by the Senior Fund staff, with clear expectation setting about their roles. Throughout the process, input from the Design Team shaped the way the broader community was engaged, as well as determining the next steps.
Inviting a short-term table
Sometimes, the table may be convened for only one meeting, giving just a few hours for targeted feedback and input. This can be an opportunity to add additional expertise and wisdom, while giving a glimpse into the process for other people.
- Best for: Adding additional expertise and wisdom to an ongoing process. Tables like these often highlight specific questions or opportunities, gathering perspectives and bringing people who may not have the time or inclination to be involved in longer-term ways. This input needs to be synthesized with input from others in order to find alignment.
- Managing invitations: Match the mode to maximize participation. Since these are short-term engagements, it’s important that the structure of this table maximizes people’s ability to contribute. That could mean being thoughtful about in-person versus virtual meetings, as well as using a mix of types of prompts and questions to ensure that the short time together is worthwhile.
- Process for trust-building: Share context and information before and during. These tables often involve stakeholders who are coming in fresh to a conversation. Be sure that any materials shared in advance to frame the conversation give participants enough context without being overwhelming. Having a clear point of contact for additional questions can help humanize the invite as well as ensure concerns or questions can be addressed in advance. Be sure to share the next steps, so participants know where their input will go and how it will be considered.
- Challenges with this structure: Narrow focus may miss some bigger-picture conversations. Sticking with a narrow focus for a short-term table may mean that some of the valuable perspectives may not have a space for discussion. There may be a need for additional follow-up conversations to get into topics or perspectives not yet heard.
- Example: Creating a new vision for Land Use in St. Louis. In the development of the Land Use Plan for the City of St. Louis, a number of smaller tables were convened, both to focus on geographies and to focus on specific topics, like issues of accessibility, industrial uses, and the needs of businesses. These focused tables allowed additional feedback and depth that went beyond what the general community engagement or feedback from the Steering Committee provided. Each of these convenings was an opportunity to bring more people into the process, while also tailoring the questions to their expertise.
Are you convening a table for alignment or decision making? Tell us about what’s worked and what you’ve learned, by leaving a comment or sending an email to hello@publicdesignbureau.com.
Public Design Bureau 