A support facilitator studying psychology, our first team member based in NSW and a brand new participant recruitment coordinator... meet the newest additions to the MosaicLab team: Polo, Polly and Gus! Learn more about this trio of terrific team members and gain some insights into who they REALLY are through their answers to our fast five questions!
How should we plan for the new energy future while providing affordable services that meet changing customer and community needs? Two representative ‘Voice of the Customer’ panels in Queensland answered this question. Randomly selected, everyday customers deliberated and agreed on recommendations that electricity distributors Ergon Energy Network and Energex used to prepare Regulatory Proposals for the Australian Energy Regulator (AER). Delve into a tale of two deliberative customer panels, and gain ideas and insights you can draw on for your next project.
We believe in supporting emerging and underserved people and communities to have deeper conversations that lead to stronger democracies. ML Giving is the new name of the not-for-profit part of MosaicLab - a banner for the work we do that gives back. We’re focussing on furthering community inclusion and action beyond just getting input and instead moving into enabling local decision-making. Explore the principles ML Giving will operate under, and the kind of projects and conversations we’re supporting.
Jemena Electricity Network has been implementing a comprehensive engagement program for the organisation's 2026-2031 Regulatory Proposal, employing a multi-dimensional approach to allow customers direct influence over proposed future pricing and services. MosaicLab codesigned and lead the facilitation of the process, that included a deliberative panel and brings diverse customer, stakeholder, and industry perspectives into the decision-making process.
As part of the development of Ausgrid's 2024-2029 regulatory submission, two randomly selected customer panels deliberated over a collective 10 full days. The panels, facilitated by MosaicLab and Gauge Consulting, considered how Ausgrid should look to the future while remaining fair to customers today. Ausgrid's three-year engagement process allowed customers to influence what Ausgrid spends customers money on, giving them a rare insight and influence over the cost of electricity, an issue that directly impacts the lives of everyday people.
To help local councils in Victoria navigate the deliberative engagement requirements in the new Local Government Act, MosaicLab has launched a free, short guide.
This e-book is specifically for local government staff and decision makers, and aims to provide assistance and information to help councils better understand deliberative engagement, its principles and how it can be implemented into council processes to meet the new requirements of the Act.
It takes time, effort and resources to achieve best practice engagement at the best of times. And right now it’s not the best of times. We’re hearing from many that engaging at all (let alone engaging well) is difficult.
Your organisation may be grappling with how to respond to the crisis, facing reduced revenue and budget cuts, responding to increased demand for community support and services, and wondering how to sustain it all long term. Local government bodies are also working to comply with the enhanced engagement requirements set out in the Local Government Act.
So we’ve announced two new service options designed to help you engage robustly, cost-effectively and appropriately.
If you’re planning for engagement you need to consider how you engage one of your most critical stakeholder groups – decision makers. Involving them in an appropriate, effective way is a crucial step. We often see employees struggling to successfully navigate this part of their planning journey and, unfortunately, not only can it be tricky, it’s also one of the top reasons engagement processes fall over.
Get it wrong and you face a myriad of potential (unwanted) consequences. From lengthy delays to mid-process back tracking, community outrage to complete project cancellation –not only might your whole process fall over, you could cause irreparable damage to the reputation and relationships you’re attempting to build.
In today’s post, we’re highlighting the most common mistakes made in this space and providing 8 top tips for upping your decision maker engagement game.
Did you see last month's invaluable deliberation insights post? We shared a video chock full of ideas and advice from project managers who had been through a deliberative journey.
This month, we're sharing the second video in this series - insights from decision makers who have led their organisations though a deliberative engagement experience.
Advisory committees – we love them and we hate them – and we can’t stop setting them up. They're possibly the number one method of engagement in Australia.
When used effectively, these groups (also called stakeholder/community reference groups and a whole host of other titles) can provide an opportunity to gather local knowledge and input, test ideas and proposals and improve communication and relationships. However, when used improperly, run poorly, or put in place as a substitute for a comprehensive engagement process, they can create more risk than reward.
This post will help you to overcome some of the biggest challenges associated with advisory committees, and ensure that both organisation and group benefits from the experience.
Recently, we posted an interview with Lyn Carson of Active Democracy and the newDemocracy Foundation, who is working in partnership with MosaicLab to research what happens when critical thinking skills, techniques and concepts are introduced to participants in a deliberative process.
Today, in Part 2, we're talking with MosaicLab co-founder Nicole Hunter, an experienced facilitator with extensive experience in deliberative engagement. Nicole, alongside MosaicLab's other two co-founders Keith Greaves and Kimbra White, has been working to integrate critical theories into real, on-ground processes.
If you happened to come across our previous post ‘A new venture into critical thinking’, you will know that MosaicLab is currently working on a fascinating research project with Lyn Carson of Active Democracy and the newDemocracy Foundation.
A final report is now in development, and, excitingly, early indications suggest that introducing critical thinking concepts to participants during deliberative processes can result in a number of benefits.
From increased trust (between both participants themselves and between participants and decision makers) to increased ability for participants to question and understand information (including complex or technical data), the work is highlighting how these skills can enhance and transform both processes and participants.
Welcome to MosaicLab's first ever #MonthlyMyth post. There are a number of myths and misconceptions that often surface in relation to facilitation, deliberative democracy, outrage management, conflict management and community engagement more broadly.
As part of our work to promote quality engagement practice and share information and learning we are addressing some of the most commonly expressed myths and misconceptions each month on our blog. We hope you find this series interesting, informative, and perhaps a little surprising!
