The document discusses strategies for building community relations and engagement. It provides reasons for developing community relations such as seeking support, avoiding negative attitudes, and gaining influence. It outlines approaches like understanding others, maintaining long-term processes, and treating community members as equals. Tactics mentioned include outreach, sharing publications, collaborating on programs, and participating in community events. The overall goal is to promote a positive organizational image and actively serve the community.

1. Community engagement
starts from community
relations
For HK Electricity
Annita MAU
annitaskmau@yahoo.com.hk
7 June 2013

2. Community / stakeholder
relations
As one of the public relations function, is the
organisation’s planned, active and continuing
participation with and within a community to
maintain and enhance its environment to the benefits
of both the organisation and the community

3. Reasons for building
community relations
 Seek support (resources and spiritual)
 Avoid unnecessary and unintended negative
attitude from community leaders
 Build up connections with organisations with
common interests to form powerful coalition
 Gain influence and obtain higher level of
participation in local consultative structures

4. Strategies
 A process of understanding
 A cumulative, exchange and long term
process
 Approach others with a sense of equality in
status
 Avoid concentrating the relations building in
a few persons/organisations

5. Tactics
 Reaching out (friendly visits)
 Sending publications (newsletters, bulletin,
programme information)
 Inviting or joining other organisations in
community service programmes and issues
 Taking part in ceremony and community
events

6. Promoting positive image in the
community
Actively serving the residents
Sending out publicity materials of
community programmes to major
community organisations
Writing articles and letters (based on
your expertise) to district papers

7. Promoting positive image in the
community
Being supported by the residents
Inviting other organisation members to take part
in programmes
Seeking support in signature campaigns,
questionnaires, and announcing results in district
Publications, activity reports, posters
Mobilising residents to sit on District Councils or
Area Committees

8. Promoting positive image in the
community
Organising programmes of good quality
Preparing high quality publicity materials
such as banners, posters and pamphlets
Allow time and resources in preparation

9. Promoting positive image in the
community
Friendliness and willing to co-operate
Arranging formal visits to new community
leaders
Sending out letters of appreciation to
community organisations when
appropriate

10. Promoting positive image in the
community
Being a credible and reliable
department / official
Invite prestigious persons as advisors,
patrons, work partners
Let others know what you have done, are
doing, and will do

11. Working with local organisations
/ structures
 Identify structure, scope of work, people’s
rank and responsibilities
 Access to higher decision making positions
 Use appreciation

12. Working with local organisations
/ structures
 District Councillors
 Familiarise with the funding procedure and
programmes likely to be funded
 Get into the sub-committees
 Controversial issues: keep neutral, seek
alliance

13.  Volunteers
 Support
 Intelligence
What the community has to give
in return?

14. 14
Case I
In 2006, someone
wanted a set of
traffic lights
installed in
Causeway Bay

15.  A developer wants to have a set of traffic
lights installed in front of its commercial
building
 To increase pedestrians and customers flow
Overview

16. Junction of Yee Wo Street and
Pennington Street, Causeway Bay

17. The developer hired a PA
consultancy

18. What did the PA consultancy
do?
 Research: who else may be benefited from the
traffic lights?
 Who are inconvenienced by no traffic lights?
 Who will object to the traffic lights?
 Traffic / transport consultant + PA consultancy
 Proposal submitted to TD
 No / mediocre response received from TD
 Then what?
 Liaison / lobby
 With whom?

19. Liaison / lobbying targets
 TD
 District Council and relevant sub-committee
 Rehabilitation groups and disabled
individuals

20. On-going challenges
 Change of personnel in TD
 Bus companies’ objections
 Reaction of rehabilitation groups, individuals?
 District Council’s support?
 A lengthy process

21. Outcome – after long and
persistent lobby, basing on the
community relations built
 TD submits proposal to DC sub committee

22. 銅鑼灣交通改善計劃

23.  香港經濟開始復蘇，銅鑼灣購物區之交通，不論
車流或人流數目均不斷增加，引致嚴重的交通擠
塞及行人路擠迫
 我們設計了3項交通改善方案以改善銅鑼灣區及
怡和街一帶的行車及行人環境。
背景

24. 建議的交通改善方案 –
Before
方案一

25.  准許車輛於摩頓台北行右轉往高士威道東行
建議的交通改善方案 - 方案一

26. 建議的交通改善方案 –
Before
方案二

27. 建議的交通改善方案 - 方案二
 在邊寧頓街近怡和街加
設交通燈行人過路處

28. 建議的交通改善方案 - 方案三
 重新編排怡和街及伊榮
街西行之巴士站

29. Case analysis
 The initiator is for commercial purpose
 The government can make use (engage) one
stakeholder (PA consultant) to lobby other
stakeholders (District Council and disabled
groups)
 Develop options which lead to win-win
outcome

31. Case Study Three
31

32. Children’s Cancer
Foundation
 Established in 1990
 Serves 250 new cancer child patients (family) each
year
 Runs a head office, a family centre, a respite
centre, a hostel, provides children cancer service in
5 public hospitals
 Revenue reaches 20mil+
 Receives donation 1mil+ each month
 Spends about 1mil+ each month
 Never conducts direct fundraising activities
 Has started advocated a Children Hospital since
2005
32

33. Children’s Specialist
Hospital
 June 2005 - A proposal on a Children’s Specialist
Hospital in HK
 December 2005 – Children’s Specialist Hospital
stakeholder survey summary report (during which
many groups were met, liaised, lobbied, engaged)
33

34. Present situation
150,000 admissions
24% (36,000) need specialised
treatment
Roughly 23,000 children with serious
diseases like cancer, blood diseases,
congenital anomalies, complex
syndromes
Current services are split over 13 sites
which were not designed with
children in mind
34

35. Proposal
 World-class public and private partnering
and research institute that meets the
future needs of children with serious
illnesses
 High-quality specialised services to public
patients within current expenditures
35

36. 350 beds
Child and family friendly
environment
Public/private professional working
arrangement
Location
Research and training
Independent foundation
Costs and funding
36

37. Challenges in communication
 Four million population needs one CSH
 Present service: fragmented, not tailor made
 Impact of better health programmes to prevent
diseases
 Development and application of technologies
 Changing disease patterns in children
× Shrinking child population
× Shift to same day, ambulatory and home care
× Enhancement in the transport and communication
networks
× Opposition from medical profession
37

38.  2005 – 2007 Stakeholders engagement
campaign
 Stakeholders: Exco, Legco, government
officials, public listed companies
chairmen, medical profession: public and
private, NGOs, parents
 2007 Policy address
 2018 Opening
38

39. 39

40. Ming Pao
4 Feb 2008
40

41. 41

42. 42

43. The best outcome of
community engagement:
sometimes is indirect…

44. 44