By Paul Hutchinson Simpson, Communications and Engagement, Regeneration, Economy and Planning, Westminster City Council
Co-design is getting mentioned more and more in local government at the moment, and it means different things to different people. This isn’t much help to our hard-pressed Council Comms and Engagement team.
That is why I set up the recent LGcomms webinar on co-design with 3 great speakers: Federico Ortiz (Director of Programmes at the Future of London), Isabelle Price (Senior Associate Director at Kanda), and Angela Koch (Founding Director of ImaginePlaces). In this webinar, I wanted us to move past the label and focus on a better question: What do communications and engagement teams need to do for co-design to work well?
All three speakers made one thing clear: co-design is not just better consultation. It means giving people real influence over choices and decisions.
This might seem obvious, but it is not always easy to do.
Future of London’s research showed that 45% of professionals called their co-production projects ‘very successful’, but only 27% of community representatives agreed. That gap matters. It shows we might think we are sharing power, but people involved may not feel the same.
I took away three practical lessons.
First, be clear about what people can actually change. Co-design can’t be used if the big decisions are already made. Isabel’s view was that the best time for co-design was in the options-development stage. If limits exist because of budget, timing, or policy, be upfront about them.
Second, check if the organisation is ready. Angela made an important point: before asking if residents are ready to co-design, ask if the council is. Are colleagues willing to listen? Will the design team change its plans? Is there money to make new ideas happen? Can you explain later what changed and what stayed the same?
Third, do not label everything as co-design. Good consultation is valuable. Good engagement is not a lesser option. Sometimes the right thing is to inform people, ask for their views, and show how those views shaped the decision. Calling this co-design does not improve it and can even harm trust.
This matters for communications professionals because we often set up the process, explain it, and keep the relationship going afterwards.
Our job is not just to bring people together. We need to make sure what we promise matches what we do.
That means asking tough questions early. What can residents really influence? Who is not in the room? What happens to the feedback? How will we show the impact? Most importantly, are we ready to change?
Co-design is not about workshops, sticky notes or models. Those are just tools.
The real test is simple: when the project is done, can people point to something and say, ‘I helped shape that’?