Increasingly, public Boards and Councils solicit the views of citizens on current issues. Public input is an important part of decision making processes. Citizens who take the time to speak to their public bodies should be listened to with genuine curiosity and an appetite for learning. However, a public body must also consider other voices before finalizing its decisions.

Imagine this scenario: A community group, which is very familiar with the public input process, arranges for its most eloquent advocate to deliver a passionate plea for funding to its municipal Council. In order to increase the pressure on elected officials, the group arranges for many of its members to sit in the public gallery. If needed, this audience will cheer and applaud people who agree with it and heckle those who do not.

While listening to these voices, the Council may be inclined to be popular and give the group what it wants. However, these dynamics may be equivalent to capitulating to the schoolyard bully. Put differently, while listening to the group's voices, the Council may be ignoring other voices that must be considered for good decision-making.

Whose voices might the Council be missing? The answer is intriguing.

First, the Council may be missing the voices of its own silent members. When confronted by a determined and well organized group, quiet members may retreat and remain silent. They shouldn't do this, but sometimes they do. With their voices not being heard, the likelihood of flawed and unbalanced decisions increases.

Second, the passionate voices of the advocates may cause the Council to miss or trivialize the voices of its staff and advisors. Their duty is to provide objective professional advice, which is especially important for complex and controversial issues. If their voices are not heard or ignored, the organization could incur risk and liability.

Third, the Council may be missing the voices of ALL citizens and parties affected by its decisions. If forty citizens in the public gallery are pushing in favor or against certain outcomes, consider the 40,000 citizens who don't have the time to attend a public Council meeting, and who may be adversely affected if their voices are not considered.

Fourth, consider the citizens who were not born yet and who may be affected by today's decisions. Their voices cannot be heard, but one must consider what they would say if they could speak.

Fifth, for decisions that have environmental impacts, consider the voices of the natural environment and wildlife. They too are unable to articulate their views. Acting responsibly, you will need to consider what they would have said had they been able to express themselves.

In a recent conversation, a colleague shared this idea with me: To ensure that all voices are considered, his group places a few empty chairs in the centre of its meeting room, to remind members of the voices of absent parties. From time to time, a member would say: "I am wondering what ___ would think about this issue."

Why not consider such an idea for your group?

Good luck.