Authorization of the feedback loop is often necessary to fund, staff and begin the process; this step refers to a broader process of securing buy-in that must still be built and maintained across decision-makers and members of the public.

The feedback loop process may affect high-impact or high-value decisions – such as the budget, development plans or services. In responding to feedback, the team will need to work with elected officials, civil service, political staff and others across local authority institutions who also help make these decisions or support these functions within the local authority. Once a team is formed (see Step 2), it will be worthwhile assigning some members of the team the job of managing buy-in – meaning informing, engaging and updating important stakeholders at important steps.

Who should be brought in – A simple stakeholder mapping

Managing buy-in should start with a simple stakeholder mapping exercise. The specific method for stakeholder mapping can differ, but the goal is to prioritize who to engage, at what times and how. Begin by simply listing stakeholders and then compare them by evaluating their power (influence to support or block the process) or their interests (where they align with your goals and where they do not). See Annex III for more information.

  • Elected officials: Consider elected officials (if they have not already authorized or are not already leading the implementation team), such as the mayor and local councilors. In addition, consider peer-elected officials or factions: If you are part of a political party or coalition within the elected council, will you share information about the process with others in the body and invite them to participate? Some may turn you down, but some may not. Collaborating across party or faction lines can demonstrate to the public that the exercise is nonpartisan and focused on their feedback rather than the priorities of elected officials.
  • Bureaucratic leadership and staff: The heads of departments relevant to the problem or issue that your feedback loop will tackle (e.g., the head of the finance department for budgeting) can be especially helpful. In addition, determine whether there are subject matter experts in the local administration whose skills can support the process – for example, officers responsible for right to information and transparency issues, teams responsible for citizen communication or engagement, urban planners, or gender and inclusion officers. Buy-in might involve a face-to-face meeting with a key decision-maker or an all-hands meeting to brief staff on the plan and answer questions.  Be clear about what you’re asking for and how the process will affect them, and be responsive to any feedback they have. With these leaders informed of the process, they may avail the process of their staff’s expertise, time and resources. They can also provide information about relevant timelines and ongoing coordination. These officials and their staff can guide the feedback loop team through the potentially byzantine requirements and expectations of their bureaucracies. This will help set realistic timelines.  Remember that you cannot bring public priorities into a process that has already ended! For example, in certain countries, local infrastructure priorities are communicated to the central government five to six months before the local budget is finalized. This allows the central government time to calculate and allocate inter-government transfers (which in turn make up a chunk of local authority budgets).
  • CSOs and local activists, including academia and the business sector, as relevant: Proactively reaching out to civil society groups can help smooth implementation. Their feedback may even help you design and implement outreach (see Step 4, especially key informant interviews [KII]). Can you tap into relevant networks – for example, of women, veterans, students or people with disabilities? If these are constituent groups you’d like to reach, these organizations may be able to assist; however, pay attention to inclusion and power dynamics. Are these organizations or networks truly representative of this constituent group (perhaps they only include people with disabilities of a certain faith or ethnicity)? Will you need to supplement this input with additional outreach?
  • The public: Although you will be reaching out to the public (or a sample of them) shortly for their input, this is truly the ultimate stakeholder in this process. Once the process is confirmed to be moving ahead, be sure to inform the public that it is happening and what they might be able to expect.

Box 10. Quick stakeholder mapping

There are many ways to conduct a stakeholder mapping. This is a simple way to develop and organize an initial list of important groups, identify who may be the most impacted – positively or negatively – by the issue being examined through the feedback loop, and consider how they can best be reached to solicit feedback or input and otherwise become engaged in the process. The stakeholder mapping can also be “zoomed in” or “zoomed out,” depending on the problem. For buy-in, you might focus initially on mapping the actors and institutions within the local authority administration; for the design of outreach methods, you might map the broader community (i.e., all residents in the area overseen by the local authority).

  1. List all potential stakeholders in the community: Consider your residents and the various groups or identities they identify with; list all of the groups relevant to the problem you have identified. For example:
    1. Gender: women, men, nonbinary
    2. Age groups: youth, older adults, working age
    3. Language, religious or ethnic minorities
    4. Urban and rural residents
    5. Poverty, access to technology
    6. Employment: farmers, self-employed/entrepreneurs, migrant workers, factory or office workers, unemployed, pensioners, etc.
    7. Level of education, students (university, high school, etc.)
  2. For each relevant group listed, consider their relationship to the issue. Consider mapping the stakeholders using a matrix (see Figure 2):
    1. Are they very interested or not very interested in the problem and its outcome? Do they have a vested stake in a decision going one way or another? Note that right now, your team is focused on relative interest, not the value or direction of that interest (i.e., two groups with high interest in a problem may disagree on how to solve it).
    2. To what extent can they influence the decision? Do they have a high influence over the decision or decision-makers?
Power mapping matrix.

Figure 2. Stakeholder mapping matrix of influence and interest

  1. Finally, consider how these groups receive information, specifically from the government (see Section 1.3 for more specific questions). For example, do you have sex-disaggregated survey data that shows how many residents have a TV or internet access, or how many own a smartphone? Focus in particular on groups that are low power/influence and high interest (bottom right quadrant): your team may need to take extra care and steps in designing outreach to these residents.

The mapping does not need to be exhaustive. In Sections 1.3 and 1.6, you can refer back to this stakeholder analysis and expand it with regard to specific outreach practices and important groups for buy-in.

Remember! Buy-in is an ongoing process

Buy-in is not a fixed on-and-off switch – people forget or internal priorities change. If you are not regularly coordinating with these stakeholders, be sure to periodically check in or update the most important among them. Tell them what’s coming next, or perhaps send a thank-you note to their office reminding them of your meeting and their willingness to assist.

End of step checklist: 

  • You have adopted a formal authorization (if appropriate) to undertake the feedback loop process.
  • You have identified a process or issue that greater understanding of public priorities can help resolve and confirmed that it is within the power and capacity of the local authority to address this problem.
  • You have mapped your current outreach processes, as well as your context, created an initial sketch of stakeholders you will need to contact, and begun to anticipate risks or political challenges related to your plans.
  • You are confident the local authority can listen to public priorities, hold consultations and communicate updates promptly to effectively close the feedback loop.
  • You have conducted a risk analysis and considered how to integrate do-no-harm principles into the feedback loop process.
Previa Anterior