Should you engage with your stakeholders when there are risks of negative activism?
Clients often ask whether initiating proactive stakeholder engagement is beneficial when community awareness and activism can delay or threaten approvals.
It’s the classic dilemma for project managers of commercial-at-risk projects.
We appreciate that projects need certainty for investors, cost containment in the planning and approvals phase, low regulatory resistance and speed to market. Stakeholder support is often necessary; however clients routinely express their frustration about their experience with the community.
“The reality is, maintaining low stakeholder awareness about projects is a hope, not a strategy, especially in the digital era.”
On previous projects they have proactively and respectfully involved stakeholders while explaining the purpose and merits of their projects. Then they begin to experience organised, informed resistance and detect new levels of hesitancy among elected representatives and decision makers. Their proactive engagement has mobilised protest - a perverse outcome!
The safer alternative, they reason, is to prepare high-quality development applications, liaise professionally with the approval agency and then try to progress as quietly as possible, keeping likely opponents at arm’s length. Then, hopefully, with low-profile, public review and complaint is limited, with a greater likelihood of timely project approvals. This is a rational and reasonable thought process.
So why, our clients ask, should they involve stakeholders, which will likely increase protest and commercial threats, including delays? It’s a really thorny question.
Stakeholder concern and protest however are latent risks within every project. It’s up to the project manager as to when to deal with this risk. Proponents have the option of dealing with stakeholder concern proactively and professionally early in the planning approvals phase, or waiting and responding.
The reality is, maintaining low stakeholder awareness about projects is a hope, not a strategy, especially in the digital era.
Many resident associations and development interest groups register for email alerts when development applications are listed on-line with planning authorities. All project managers should thereby anticipate stakeholder interest.
What we recommend:
We recommend dealing with risk early through a considered stakeholder engagement strategy. This involves identifying all stakeholders – including protestors – and their interests. Identify project concerns such as increased traffic, environmental impacts etc., mitigate these as appropriate, prepare key messages and communicate the facts.
Do not lead by communicating issues, obviously, but tackle concerns with positive, factual information. This approach can avoid major controversy which can influence decision makers. If there are unmanaged issues and complaints, project approvals slow and conditions of approval can be more onerous, or worse, your project may not be approved.
Based on our experience over 20 years, we always prepare for a protest component within any project. Complainants will become aware of “development” projects and act on their concerns. This will include representations to local elected representatives who they expect to place under pressure, and written objections.
Neighbours close to the project, who can be more directly impacted will be disaffected if they don’t hear directly from the proponent. This can generate criticism and hostility. There are many reasons therefore to get out there early and introduce your project on your terms before you are battling protest which unnerves decision makers.