Strategic engagement: democracy’s urgent task

Globally, trust in democratic institutions and processes is rapidly waning as societies have reached a new equilibrium of contradiction, fuelling instability and distrust.

In my recent report, Strategic Engagement: Democracy’s Urgent Task,  I interrogate the evolution of strategic engagement and why it requires attention at a time when trust is perilously low and public discourse is subject to the corrosive effects of widespread misinformation and disinformation – the latter posing the most significant immediate threat to democracy.

Key politicians and leaders across Australia and New Zealand’s policy sector were asked: “What is strategic engagement exactly; why is it democracy’s most urgent task?”

Here, I examine strategic engagement as a core democratic practice and explain what leaders must do to embed it in governance.

At its most ideal, engagement improves decision-making and strengthens relationships between communities and institutions. Yet, it has often been divorced from governance and leadership.

From urgency to responsibility

Increasing attention to strategic engagement means recognising that meaningful participation cannot be reduced to compliance measures or transactional consultation – often called tick-the-box engagement.

Policies developed without robust engagement are more likely to face public resistance, reputational risk and costly project delays due to community opposition.

Additionally, in intensive project environments such as infrastructure, engagement can become politicised, focussing more on shaping perceptions rather than understanding stakeholder needs, particularly in renewables and energy.

Ironically, the professionalisation of engagement practice has led to its specialisation and fragmentation.

What was once grassroots activism has, over five decades has become a specialist practice positioned as a separate discipline rather than a leadership responsibility.

Decision-makers, often untutored in engagement expertise, deprioritise it, viewing it as a way to gather feedback they may not like, or as a risk of political blowback in the extreme.

Here, engagement activities can be perceived as manipulation rather than authentic dialogue, thus further corroding public trust.

Building trust, however, is not just an outcome of engagement but a condition for its success. Strategic engagement is purpose-driven, long-term and influence-oriented.

It is designed to shape decisions, build stakeholder relationships, and support decision-making for sustained impact – a practice capable of rebuilding legitimacy for and by institutions.

Without clarity and safeguards, however, it risks shifting participation from a democratic practice to a policy-driven exercise.

Examining current challenges reveals that existing approaches do not operate at a strategic level.

Leaders across all levels of government pointed to poor timing and “faux consultation” where communities are engaged on already-reached decisions.

As one interviewee put it, “If you distance people, don’t involve them, then you’re setting yourself up to be resisted.”

Some acknowledge this risk: “Once communities hear it’s a government engagement, people just switch off.”

The professionalisation of practice has created silos, with many decision-makers lacking engagement literacy and regarding it as administrative rather than a strategic capability.

To subscribe to the GovInsider bulletin, click here. 

At the same time, political leaders often fear feedback, which is compounded by the corrosive impact of mis- and disinformation. These challenges highlight the urgent need for engagement – not only to counter these impacts, but also to demonstrate its vital role in strengthening trust.

What leaders must do

Embedding strategic engagement in governance requires decision-makers to treat it as a strategic leadership capability rather than an isolated discipline.

This shift calls for a more sophisticated understanding of engagement, integrating it into governance frameworks and policy formation.

Without such an integration shift, engagement remains reactive, compartmentalised and ineffective at building trust.

Leaders must also resist paralysis caused by the fear of backlash or error and should communicate not only the outcomes but also the rationale, constraints, and processes behind decisions – even when these do not satisfy all stakeholders.

Embedding engagement means hardwiring it from the outset, especially in intensive project environments, where engagement cannot be left to the final steps before “putting the shovel down”.

Leaders need to involve engagement professionals from project inception, build in evaluation mechanisms from the beginning, and adopt systematic approaches that document activities, assess if participants felt heard, and demonstrate how final outcomes reflect input.

Institutionalising strategic engagement requires standards and safeguards. Establishing a standardised definition and framework prevents its dilution, ensures trust and efficacy, and avoids misuse, creating consistency across sectors.

Legislation could help formalise minimum standards, making engagement a scrutinised and enforceable practice instead of a discretionary exercise.

As strategic engagement requires long-term relationship-building – while political stakeholders often work in short, reactive cycles – leaders must ensure it is a sustained governance practice, not just a response to shifting pressures.

Embedding engagement also demands clarity and transparency in communication. Institutional language should not remain hierarchical or compliance-driven, but instead reflect co-creation, mutual accountability and responsiveness.

Since language shapes power dynamics and reflects how governments see their relationship with the public, transparent communication strategies are essential. These should reflect diverse contexts and reinforce engagement as relational governance rather than a transactional step.

In short, leaders must embed engagement systematically and treat it as a core leadership responsibility. Only then can governance reclaim trust and sustain democratic legitimacy.

Democracy under strain

While social capital is increasingly important across the public sector, strategic engagement faces the constant risk, in contested informational environments, of being mistaken for manipulation or partisan intervention.

Raising awareness, understanding, and the value of engagement must be closely tied to how knowledge is produced, validated and disseminated.

The erosion of trust due to disinformation creates an adversarial landscape that can threaten the legitimacy of engagement.

Practitioners must counter false narratives and sustain credibility and legitimacy in public discourse.

In super-diverse communities amid collapsing institutional trust, strategic engagement is essential for decision-makers.

Ultimately, the challenge of embedding strategic engagement thus reflects the broader struggle for democratic legitimacy and informed participation. It demands vigilance against manipulation, adaptability to emerging threats, and a renewed commitment to meaningful participation.

Without sustained and credible commitment, engagement remains reactive and compartmentalised instead of strategically anchored in governance, where it can foster long-term trust in democratic processes. In short, strategic engagement is democracy’s urgent task.

---------

An in-depth analysis of this topic can be found in the report, Strategic Engagement: Democracy’s Urgent Task, Sally Hussey, 2025, available to download at Engagement Institute https://engagementinstitute.org.au/resources/thought-leadership-series/ and also available at Analysis Policy Online https://apo.org.au/node/332056

---------

The author is a leading voice in engagement and democratic practice, recognised for her analysis of political and institutional influences on public participation. She works across research, policy, and practice, contributing insights on institutional trust and democratic futures, and is recognised in the Who’s Who of Australian Women.