Vice Chair Jo asked me for a chat the other day. She was thinking about co-opting additional members to a scrutiny task and finish group and feeling a bit conflicted. Here is how we talked it though - what do you think?

The group was being set up to look at adult social care and Jo was thinking about three people that it might be helpful to work with - one from the carers centre, an academic from the local university and someone who is a non-executive member of the integrated care board.

Jo knew that a couple of her colleagues would be less than enthusiastic and so she wanted to be sure of her group before making any suggestions.

I thought a plus / minus activity might help Jo to reach a decision and so that’s what we did.

PLUS

First, we made a list of the reasons why this might be a good idea.

Well, the EXPERTISE of a co-optee could be invaluable to supplement the knowledge that the councillors already had - helping them to shape questions, conclusions and recommendations. A co-optee might also bring valuable EXPERIENCE of the issue - maybe even lived experience.

Beyond this a co-optee might bring CREDIBILITY to the inquiry, both for the executive and for partners, giving the final report more weight. They might also have valuable CONNECTIONS to help with evidence gathering - bringing new witnesses into the scrutiny process using contacts and relationships that the councillors didn’t have.

In terms of the group, they might also bring extra CHALLENGE into deliberation, helping to prevent group-think. They might also encourage NEW WAYS OF WORKING. After all, councillors can be sometimes set in their ways and having someone new in the team might just disrupt the meeting dynamics in a positive and creative way.

MINUS

Then we listed some reasons why this might not be such a great idea.

First, there would have to be a RECRUITMENT process in line with council policy. This takes time, of course, and might not have led to the outcome that Jo was hoping for. Extra time resources would also be needed for TRAINING AND SUPPORT, depending on who was co-opted. Would there also be an OPPORTUNITY COST if one person was co-oped at the expense of another?

Could there actually be a negative effect on GROUP DYNAMICS? The councillors all know each other well and mighty feel inhibited with new people joining the group- worse, it might be someone they actively DISLIKE. Or maybe someone the cabinet member or partners dislike, causing them to disengage from the process.

Finally, Jo wondered about the STAYING POWER of any co-optee given the likely six months that the group would meet for - maybe longer if they reconvened to follow up. Beyond expenses, there is no budget to pay them for their time of course.

​

​

So, I think Jo found the exercise helpful and I think she knows which way she wants to go now. I wonder what you think though? Perhaps you have some helpful experience to share?

​

If you want to see/add any comments, you can find this post on LinkedIn here.