Sometimes, I Muse

The BC Public Service - Who do we really represent?

Are we truly representative of the diverse general public like we claim to be? Are we truly engaging the public equally and providing assistance to those who truly need it with these targeted programs and incentives we come up with in our virtual boardrooms? We put out calls for public engagement and feedback on plans and frameworks and then pat ourselves on the back for being open and transparent and inclusive with these processes, but are we actually excluding large swaths of our population in the very formalized and structured way that we request their engagement? We put up these 30-100 plus page documents and send them out to communities to be implemented, but were they engaged in the plan? Did they provide feedback? What about their citizens? These huge documents full of government jargon and language are incredibly difficult for the average person to interpret and understand – I still have trouble with all of the jargon and acronyms! Even the pre-work to this course, it was a 23 page document to review. It provided an outline of ideas and step by step instructions. Some structure, a framework. I skimmed through it, dismayed by the very rigid and formalized way the information was presented. Do you want to know what stood out to me? Page 9 Planning and Design principles. Know the experience and motivation of your audience. Modify the level of detail for your audience. One suggestion in the BC public service is 2-4 slides for executives. Keyword points on slides to facilitate absorption – max of 6 words per screen.

Executives want bullet points and the Coles notes version of complex problems, yet we expect the general public to digest these extensive, jargon filled documents and provide feedback, sometimes in the form of a written essay in a set time frame. We exclude them by intimidating them. Is it possible that we are creating a deeper divide instead of building bridges and creating connections with communities with these processes? Are we really representing the best interests of the average citizen of BC? Are we really champions of diversity, equity, and inclusion or are we just trying to fill quotas and create elaborate documents full of buzzwords that will make us look good in the eyes of other high-level, very educated people and their associated institutions? Are we truly trying to build back better or are we just making more empty promises and speaking hollow words? Are we actually engaging the public we claim to represent? Are we actually capturing the diversity of thought, diversity of opinion, and diversity of experience from our audience?

So, I have to ask all of you: What are we doing and who are we really serving? Do we really know our audience? Do we really understand them?