How Victorian councils can engage communities that consultation normally misses
When consultation repeatedly hears from the same people, examine how the process invites participation. People may care deeply about an issue while being unable or unwilling to use the methods offered. Inclusion starts with changing the conditions of participation.
Practical guidance for scoping work. Adapt it to the project and check current policy and applicable requirements. Numbered references identify sources supporting factual statements; the recommended workflow is Soft Infrastructure’s practice guidance.
1. Diagnose barriers in the process
Review who participated in earlier engagement and whose experience remains absent. Compare available participation information with the affected community, while respecting privacy and the limits of the data. Ask whether the invitation, location, timing, language or perceived scope for influence excluded people.
The Victorian Better practice guide identifies barriers organisations can create, including inaccessible spaces, using one language and consulting the same people repeatedly [1]. Use these prompts to examine the process. Avoid treating a broad identity group as if all its members have the same needs or opinions.
2. Build relationships before asking for responses
Speak with trusted community organisations and people already working in the area. Ask what would make participation useful and safe, and whether the timing or approach is appropriate. Recognise that intermediaries have their own capacity limits and should not be expected to speak for everyone.
Agree roles and resourcing with partners. Where appropriate, support community-led or peer-led approaches. The Victorian guide offers community-specific considerations, including working through trusted youth workers and offering different ways to contribute [2]. Adapt these ideas through discussion with the people involved.
3. Offer accessible ways to participate
Provide a choice of channels suited to the decision: a conversation, telephone response, written input, accessible online activity or small group. Ask about access requirements early. Consider interpreters, accessible venues, transport, hearing support, plain language and time to read materials.
Plan practical support and reimbursement where appropriate to the organisation’s policy and the activity. Explain arrangements clearly before people commit. Keep participation proportionate: a person should not need to disclose a sensitive life history to express a view about a local service or public space.
4. Design for safety and meaningful influence
Explain what can change, who will see the information and how comments will be reported. Separate contact details from analysis where possible and agree how quotations may be used. Make withdrawal and feedback processes clear. Check relevant organisational privacy and safeguarding procedures.
Traditional Owners and Aboriginal communities require relationships and approaches appropriate to Country and self-determination; do not substitute a generic stakeholder exercise. Consider cultural safety and power differences within as well as between groups. Seek appropriate guidance rather than assuming that a single representative can endorse a whole community’s view.
5. Check who remains missing and follow through
Monitor participation while there is still time to adapt. If a method is reaching only familiar voices, change the approach and record why. Analyse differences and disagreement, and describe the limits of what was heard. Avoid claiming that an inclusive process reached everyone.
Return findings in formats people can use. Explain how input influenced the decision and identify unresolved issues. The Victorian guide recommends updates and reporting back as ways to avoid tokenistic participation [1]. Maintain the relationships and carry lessons into the next project rather than beginning again with another request for unpaid insight.
A practical scope checklist
- Reviewed process barriers
- Agreed roles with trusted partners
- Multiple accessible participation options
- Consent, safety and influence made clear
- Participation gaps and follow-through recorded
Sources and further reading
Sources checked 7 October 2026. Follow the original guidance for its full context and updates.