By Karen Thoreson and Greg Stopka

How do ideas or new practices get introduced and accepted in local government? In business, companies invest in research and development to create new products and services to introduce to their markets or customers. If the new product is welcomed in the marketplace, other companies may copy or adapt the idea to bring to their own customers.

But in local government, most organizations don’t have a research-and-development division, and there isn’t a well-defined third party that is dedicated to testing new ideas for local governments to try.

The Alliance for Innovation (AFI), along with ICMA and Arizona State University, has a joint mission to identify local government practices that improve results. Together, the three organizations are constantly on the lookout for new practices that are being adopted.

Through observation, case studies, and other methods, we assess whether a new practice provides better results such as improved community outcomes, cost savings, environmental enhancements, or organizational productivity. It is a messy process, and often we have to rely on first-party accounts of improvement rather than rigorous testing.

A recent example that can be documented illustrates how local governments have changed the way they do business in less than a decade. Engagement with residents has literally transformed how communities talk with their residents and how many decisions are reached at the local level.

A Bold Move at the Right Time

In 2010, during one of the world’s most aggressive and damaging recessions in recent history, ICMA and AFI commissioned a white paper from Arizona State University that was authored by Professors Janet Denhardt and James Svara and titled The Connected Community: Local Governments as a Partner in Citizen Engagement and Community Building (http://transformgov.org/en/knowledge_network/documents/kn/document/301763).

It was a bold move to publish it at a time when most local governments were struggling with reduced revenues, a needier populace, and discouraged communities. As it turned out, the timing was perfect, as local governments were forced to discover new models to deliver basic services; connecting with their residents was the absolutely right way to determine how to move forward.

The paper was quickly translated into a workshop format and during the next three years, we actively promoted the paper’s concepts at national, state, and local conferences, promoting models of engagement that varied from informing residents, consulting with residents, collaborating with residents, and empowering residents to make decisions for the good of the entire community.

Fundamentally, the report turned the notion of “five minutes at the microphone” on its head, which at the time was the recognized approach to getting public input. Rather, it declared that residents could constructively contribute toward building community solutions, and that leaving the tough decisions to solely local government experts disenfranchised residents and ultimately built mistrust.

The paper initially received both accolades and pessimistic feedback. The local government believers in broad and meaningful engagement were delighted to have academia underscore their belief in the importance of an informed and active community.

But many in the field in those early years opined that residents were only self-interested and did not have a grasp on the facts in complex problems. These managers often felt beleaguered with hearing the same, negative voices at the microphone during public comment week after week.

AFI annually solicits case studies from member organizations and the entire local government field for presentation at its spring “Transforming Local Government” conference. The cases are intended to showcase what type of solutions local governments are pursuing and how those projects have organizational or community impact.

As early as 2011, we began to see a real change in the tone and substance of the projects. Increasingly, communities brought forth projects wholly focused on unique engagement or projects where engagement with residents and stakeholders was a key component to the work that was accomplished.

A Trend Whose Time Has Come

That trend is only amplified today. We received approximately 135 submissions for consideration for our 2016 conference, and more than 80 percent of the applications had an important component of resident and stakeholder engagement.

Now, AFI staff members are taking the wealth of material that local governments shared and are diving deeper into that content at the organization’s Innovation Labs, which will be held in various regions in the months ahead.

The labs were developed from the idea that, although innovations in local government occur, evidence was lacking for ideas being adopted in other parts of the country. In total, nearly 200 stories were collected on how local governments are working with residents to help solve local problems.

In AFI’s central region alone, we have identified communities that are creating citizen-action teams, leadership forums, open-data platforms, community-budgeting tools, visioning processes, volunteer opportunities, and more exciting methods to include residents in identifying ways to make their community more inclusive, competitive, and involved.

These examples will be shared with lab participants who will consider how they might adapt these examples and introduce them in their own organizations. Examples include Wyoming, Ohio, which uses community forums to explore a “Me-We-Us” approach to solving wicked local problems (http://transformgov.org/en/Article/106816) and Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (http://transformgov.org/en/knowledge_network/documents/kn/document/308005), which operates a Civic Technology Meetup where tech savvy residents help the city create new projects and applications to improve the community.

Another exciting example is Brooklyn Park, Minnesota (http://www.brooklynpark.org/get-involved/connect-new-neighbors), which created the New Connect Welcome Wagon where resident volunteers share a reusable tote bag with new homeowners that is filled with such information as area recreational programs, library services, and maps of local parks and trails.

To assist with this process, AFI’s private, nonprofit, and academic partners served as action leaders to help guide the process and provide expertise. By bringing these leaders in civic engagement together with the local government practitioners, the intention is to create an environment that can encourage innovation.

The outcome goal is for attendees to leave with a plan to develop new pilot ideas in their organizations. Following the initial interactions, AFI will assist attendees by introducing them to the governments that have implemented the ideas they are interested in adopting.

Moving the Needle

Finally, this coming fall, we will follow-up with attendees and see how their ideas have developed. Almost no one in local government was talking about citizen engagement in the midst of the fiscal crisis. Only a few saw engagement as a method of helping local governments find their way to a more fiscally sustainable future.

We now see that The Connected Community provided a road map for local governments to craft the right means to engage residents in making their communities better.

Through their work, Professors Denhardt and Svara literally moved the needle in how local governments undertake their daily work. Impact at its essence!