Meet MosaicLab
Nicole Hunter
TEAM SPOTLIGHT: POLO, POLLY & GUS

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!

TEAM SPOTLIGHT: POLO, POLLY & GUS
Case studies
Nicole Hunter
CASE STUDY: THE TALE OF TWO ENERGY SECTOR ...

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.

CASE STUDY: THE TALE OF TWO ENERGY SECTOR CUSTOMER PANELS
Meet MosaicLab, ML Giving
Nicole Hunter
SUPPORTING CONVERSATIONS WHERE THEY'RE NEEDED ...

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.

SUPPORTING CONVERSATIONS WHERE THEY'RE NEEDED MOST
Case studies
Nicole Hunter
CASE STUDY: Jemena

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.

CASE STUDY: Jemena
Case studies
Nicole Hunter
CASE STUDY: AUSGRID VOICE OF COMMUNITY PANEL

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.

CASE STUDY: AUSGRID VOICE OF COMMUNITY PANEL

#MonthlyMyth

#MONTHLYMYTH: NO ADULTS ALLOWED! PLAY IS FOR KIDS

#MONTHLYMYTH: NO ADULTS ALLOWED! PLAY IS FOR KIDS

When you think about the word ‘play’, what do you imagine?

We’re going to hazard a guess and assume what you don’t see is a group of adults considering important issues or strategic concepts.  That’s because cultural norms suggest that play is more at home in a playground than a boardroom. 

In this month’s myth buster, we’re going to ask you to put that limiting belief to one side for a moment.  We’re exploring how play can be used to achieve positive outcomes and new possibilities in the professional world.  Because, as it turns out, adults (even the suit-wearing ones) and organisations (even the big serious ones) might benefit from a little game now and then. 

#MONTHLYMYTH: TRANSPARENCY & RISK GO HAND IN HAND

#MONTHLYMYTH: TRANSPARENCY & RISK GO HAND IN HAND

‘Transparency’ is a key term in the world of engagement.   We all know that it’s central to any robust, effective engagement process.

It’s also a word that, for some, goes hand in hand with risk and a loss of order and control.  That makes sense - because being honest, sharing the problem and providing in-depth insights into an issue can feel scary. 

Today, we're addressing this myth and providing some reasons to be brave, risks to be aware of and key starting points when it comes to transparency. 

,

#MonthlyMyth: Glossy, simple content = informed participants

,
#MonthlyMyth: Glossy, simple content = informed participants

When you’re preparing information inputs for a community engagement process, organisations can spend a lot of time producing glossy brochures and simplified, summarised content.  It’s easy to get lost in all the posters and paragraphs and lose sight of what’s important - what you’re really saying about the issue or decision at hand.

Getting the balance right can be challenging.  So, in this post we’ll not only address this months myth, we’ll also give you 6 simple tips for providing the right information at the right level of detail.

,

#MonthlyMyth: Firm positioning required before engaging

,
#MonthlyMyth: Firm positioning required before engaging

It’s an easy trap to fall into, and an approach that’s often taken as a matter of course – solidify your organisation’s position before you engage with any external community or stakeholders.  While this may appear (in the short term) to make your organisation feel more ready to engage, it actually undermines many of the objectives of a robust engagement process. 

#MonthlyMyth: Warm up activities have no purpose

#MonthlyMyth: Warm up activities have no purpose

Now and then we hear people say that what you might loosely categorise as ‘warm up’ or ‘introductory’ or ‘getting to know you’ activities are pointless exercises with no real purpose.   It is assumed (perhaps?) that they are something facilitators do just because that’s what facilitators do and they like to ‘play games, not because they have any bearing on the issue at hand or any tangible benefit to the group.

We can’t speak on behalf of all these types of activities (perhaps there are some out there that really are annoying, pointless and fluffy!); however, today, with the kind of activities that an effective, experienced facilitator might use in mind, we’re debunking this myth.

#MonthlyMyth: Tables enhance conversation

#MonthlyMyth: Tables enhance conversation

We are often drawn towards what we know – it’s comfortable sticking to what we are used to doing, seeing and experiencing.  However, when it comes to engagement, sometimes comfortable doesn’t equal effective, and this month’s myth is a perfect example.

#MonthlyMyth: Build it (online) and they will come

#MonthlyMyth: Build it (online) and they will come

Online tools are an important part of the modern engagement landscape.  They offer a broad range of benefits from ease and flexibility of access to handy data analysis options.   They can be absolutely worth the investment, and are integral parts of most successful, contemporary engagement processes. 

However, it's a mistake to think that a great online platform or tool alone will solve all your engagement problems or attract high levels of participation - no matter how much you spent on building it or how long you spent on perfecting it. 

This monthly myth touches on a mistake that is pretty easy to make and can catch organisations out, leaving them without much of a return on what can be a significant investment.

#MonthlyMyth: Tight communication reins = risk minimisation

#MonthlyMyth: Tight communication reins = risk minimisation

Many organisations try to minimise risk by 'holding the reins tight' when it comes to communicating with their communities and stakeholders around engagement processes and major projects/decisions. 

This so-called 'risk averse' approach tends to include carefully constructing tightly worded (yet often very uninformative) key messages and strictly withholding any information deemed potentially inflammatory or uncomfortable - even when inextricably relevant to the issue at hand.

There's also approval processes applied to the release of any information, which can slow down communication activities - sometimes to a considerable extent - depending on how rigid or intricate these processes are. 

While organisations tend to feel comfortable with this well-worn approach, the promise of 'safety' through control is generally just an illusion.