The art of structure over script

Seattle Public Schools has spent the better part of the last decade making just about everyone upset, so it was with considerable surprise that I emerged from a recent SPS community meeting commenting on what an effective bit of stakeholder engagement I had just experienced. Most notably, I was impressed for reasons that had almost nothing to do with anything that had been said.

When you need to change the dynamics with your stakeholders, or even just communicate effectively with them, the structure of the engagement is frequently more important than the words you use, and Superintendent Ben Shuldiner's team nailed the structure of this community meeting in ways worth noting for anyone doing this work.

First — everyone felt heard. This is possibly the most obvious, yet most frequently overlooked element of effective stakeholder engagement. Perfectly crafted messaging is worthless if critical audiences aren't open to hearing it, and the best way to be heard by hostile or emotional stakeholders is to be a good listener. Shuldiner made this happen by structuring the bulk of the meeting around small group discussions where literally everyone in attendance shared something they cared about that an SPS staff member wrote down, and then had the chance to share out their group's main points to the entire audience during the last 30 minutes. Shuldiner thoughtfully listened to each group's share out from the podium, jotting down notes—a simple bit of visible listening that was the opposite of a typical defensive leader on the hot seat.

Second — anger and emotion were channeled into constructive engagement. It's no secret that acknowledging stakeholders' feelings is essential to keep a situation from getting worse. But if the goal is more than simply doing no harm, creating a channel to turn that emotion into constructive engagement is one of the best ways to actually begin to shift the dynamics. Shuldiner didn't hide from criticism—each small group was instructed to spend a significant amount of time discussing what was "not going well." However, the final part of each group discussion and share out afterward was focused on what SPS should do proactively to address the issues that had been identified. While the District certainly can't follow through on all of the ideas, in the moment, participants were forced to pivot their focus from anger and frustration to the future they wanted to see, creating a sense of hope and positivity in both the small groups and among the attendees as a whole as the event wrapped up.

Third — analog engagement built a personal connection. Technology has created tremendously powerful communications channels, but there is simply nothing more effective with emotional stakeholders than creating a human connection, face to face. It's a lot harder to maintain anger and distrust when you've looked someone in the eye and shared a moment. Shuldiner was appropriately humble and likable in his comments from the podium and stuck around afterward to chat one-on-one with attendees, but the real differentiator was a format that enabled him to wander through the event during the small group discussions, not seeking conversation, but simply being open and available for people to engage with him in an informal way, which happened over and over again. The whole crowd saw him wander by, likely several times, and in those moments he was just a person, there trying to do the right thing. Seeing Shuldiner as a human, not an organizational entity, shifts the frame of engagement from the emotion-driven conversations of the online space to a more rational, collaborative mindset.

Events like these are time-consuming and expensive to run, but when executed effectively, can make a huge difference in just about any context—from employee disputes to customer backlash and regulatory fights. Too often, the instinct in those moments is to tighten up—a tighter script, less unstructured time, a clean exit. An understandable response, but one that frequently makes things worse. Shuldiner opened up, and in doing so, created a safety valve for the opinion-makers among multiple key stakeholders, particularly the engaged parents and teachers, to feel like they matter, to express their feelings in a positive and constructive environment, and to build a personal connection with him.

As too many of us have learned in our personal lives, if there is no actual engagement, no amount of message discipline will improve a relationship. The same is true with stakeholders. When the structure enables people to feel truly heard, to collaborate, to connect, real engagement becomes possible.

Well done, SPS.