Say what the group can change
Before inviting participants, write a plain-language account of the project’s decision boundaries. Identify what is fixed, what is open and who holds authority over each area. A venue may control wall fixings while the group controls imagery. A funder may set a budget while contributors choose which proposed features deserve priority. Hidden boundaries turn participation into frustration.
Use the word co-design only when people can materially influence the outcome. If you are gathering comments on an almost finished design, describe that activity honestly as consultation or feedback. A limited invitation can still be valuable when its limits are clear. What damages trust is promising shared authorship while retaining an undisclosed veto over every meaningful choice.
Invite the people affected, not only the available
A convenient workshop time does not produce a representative group. Think about who uses the place, who maintains it, who may be inconvenienced by the project and who rarely attends organized activities. Use more than one way to contribute: a conversation, a small making session, a written response or a visit to a prototype.
Explain how contributions will be used and what acknowledgment or compensation is available. Where the project relies on substantial lived experience or creative labor, discuss payment rather than treating visibility as sufficient reward. Do not ask one participant to speak for an entire community. Record whose perspectives remain missing and treat that absence as a limitation, not as agreement.
Gather experiences before solutions
Start with concrete situations. Ask where people pause, what makes an activity difficult or what they wish a space allowed them to do. Avoid directing every answer toward a preselected object. If the organizer has already decided that the answer is a mural, participants should know that the format is fixed rather than being invited to solve a falsely open problem.
Let people think individually before group discussion. Use drawings, objects or simple layouts to make ideas discussable without requiring specialist vocabulary. Collect observations separately from interpretations. “The seat is often empty” is different from “Nobody wants to sit here”; the second claim needs investigation before it becomes a design requirement.
Make alternatives that can be tested
Translate the group’s priorities into several rough options. Give each option enough detail to expose trade-offs without spending so much effort that change feels impossible. Cardboard models, taped outlines and paper arrangements can be useful when approved for the setting. Label what is represented accurately and what remains an assumption.
Ask participants to test an actual task rather than simply choose their favorite image. Can they read the caption from the intended position? Can someone join midway through the making process? Does the assembly method leave meaningful choices for contributors? Observe and invite explanation. A prototype is evidence for a conversation, not proof that one quick test has settled every access or safety question.
Choose a decision method before disagreement
Agree how the group will move forward when preferences differ. A vote may help rank reversible choices, but it should not overrule necessary access provisions, consent or technical safety requirements. For other decisions, a consent-based approach can ask whether anyone sees a reason the proposal cannot responsibly proceed, while preserving room for reservations.
Keep a decision record: the question, the options, the people involved, the reasons and the next review point. Note unresolved concerns in language their authors recognize. If someone with formal authority changes the group’s recommendation, explain that change and its reason. Do not quietly present a revised result as though it were the group’s original choice.
Share ownership beyond the workshop
Before production, agree credits, image permissions, reuse and maintenance responsibilities. Collective authorship does not automatically resolve copyright or ownership of physical materials. A clear written agreement can prevent different assumptions from hardening into conflict. Seek qualified legal advice where the project’s rights, funding or commercial use make that necessary.
After installation or delivery, return to participants with the outcome and the decision record. Explain what changed because of their involvement and what could not change. Invite feedback on the process itself. The most useful measure is not whether everyone liked the final object, but whether people could see and exercise a fair route from contribution to consequence.