NCDD May Webinar Recap - Rethinking Inclusivity: Expanding the Invitation in Public Engagement

On May 22, 2025, community organizers and civic professionals joined NCDD for an engaging and thought-provoking webinar, Rethinking Inclusivity: Expanding the Invitation in Public Engagement. This timely session explored how today’s political climate—while undeniably polarized—also presents opportunities to reimagine public engagement in ways that resonate across political, cultural, and geographic divides.

Co-presenters Elena Martínez-Torres (Sustained Dialogue Institute), Phillipe Cunningham (Urban Rural Action), Siri Erickson (Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement), and Tahnee Robertson (Southwest Decision Resources) shared powerful reflections on inclusive language, rural engagement, intergenerational participation, and adaptive strategies for reaching those often left out of civic spaces.

Panelists highlighted that inclusivity is not just about who is present—but how we show up, how we frame our invitations, and how we build spaces rooted in shared values like respect, fairness, and community. Participants left with concrete tools, deeper insights, and a renewed commitment to fostering belonging and representation in civic life. Read more lessons from the webinar and watch the recording below.

---

---

​Key Themes & Insights

• Inclusivity is shifting: The term “inclusion” itself has become polarized in some circles. Panelists emphasized the need to reframe or re-language these concepts while still holding to the core values of respect, representation, and shared voice.
• ​Language matters: Words like “diversity,” “equity,” and even “bridging” are differently received across political and cultural identities. Panelists stressed understanding and using language that resonates across divides.
  
• Framing matters deeply: Research from PACE shows that words like freedom, patriotism, and community are more universally appealing than terms like bipartisan or equity, especially among conservative audiences. These terms can be leveraged to widen the invitation to dialogue spaces.
  
• Language is socially loaded: Words like liberty and freedom may seem synonymous but signal different things to different people. “Freedom,” Siri noted, was more positively received because it has clearer personal meaning, highlighting the importance of contextual and cultural nuance in language.
  
• Intersectionality includes class & wealth: There’s growing interest in integrating class- and wealth-based lenses into civic language analysis. PACE has started exploring how economic identity intersects with perceptions of terms like "equality" or "opportunity."
  
• Values-first framing is more effective than identity labels: Rather than leading with group identities (e.g., “Black voices,” “youth voices”), framing around shared values (e.g., “everyone deserves a say in shaping their future”) tends to be more inviting across ideological divides.
  
• Values as common ground: Panelists emphasized that even when people disagree ideologically, shared values like respect, fairness, autonomy, and community can provide the foundation for connection and group agreements.
  
• Inclusivity ≠ representation alone: True inclusivity is not just about who’s in the room, but how people engage, how power dynamics are managed, and whether people feel safe and respected.
  
• Inclusivity as an adaptive practice: Rather than viewing inclusion as a fixed checklist or set of policies, panelists emphasized it as an ongoing, adaptive process that responds to context, power dynamics, and changing language.
  
• Inclusive dialogue requires pre-work: Elena described the importance of 1:1 conversations before group convenings, especially with communities who feel resistant or have not historically been included. Tailoring the invitation and connecting to personal motivations is crucial.
  
• Don’t wait for the perfect message—build the relationship: Sometimes practitioners over-focus on crafting the “right” language. What matters more is the trust behind the invitation. As one panelist said, “People respond to people, not perfection.”
  
• Contextual intelligence is key: What works in a university setting may not work in a rural town hall. Effective engagement requires understanding the political, cultural, and historical landscape of a community before designing the process.
  
• Dialogue needs to be tied to outcomes: Especially in underrepresented or skeptical communities, engagement without visible follow-through breeds cynicism. Panelists highlighted the importance of showing how dialogue leads to decisions, funding, or policy impact.
  
• Pronoun use as a dialogue opportunity: Instead of sidestepping discomfort, pronouns can be framed as a matter of mutual respect and group agreements. Panelists suggested offering alternate tools like using names or facilitating clarifying questions to move from positions to experiences.
  
• Inclusivity ≠ universal agreement: A more inclusive space doesn’t mean eliminating disagreement—it means creating the conditions where disagreement can be generative, respectful, and tied to collective action.
  
• Facilitators must do inner work, too: Meaningful inclusion requires self-awareness. Several panelists encouraged practitioners to examine their own biases, comfort zones, and blind spots—especially regarding who they default to involving or centering.

Best Practices & Real-World Examples

• Sustained Dialogue Institute (SDI): Elena Martínez-Torres shared SDI’s five-stage dialogue-to-action model that intentionally maps relationships before convening people—prioritizing who is most impacted, who can block change, and who brings overlooked perspectives.
• PACE’s Civic Language Perceptions Project: Dr. Siri Erickson offered data-driven insights on how civic terms resonate with voters across demographics. “Community” emerged as a uniquely “bridgy” word, while terms like “diversity” signaled liberal, urban, and younger audiences.
• Urban Rural Action (URA): Phillipe Cunningham highlighted how URA engages across rural counties, beginning with trust-building and shared values (like fairness and opportunity) while partnering with local institutions like libraries and churches.
• Southwest Decision Resources: Tahnee Robertson described environmental/public policy facilitation models that include indigenous, rural, and skeptical voices through long-term commitment, shared leadership, and participatory design.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Assuming homogeneity: Not all rural areas or youth groups are alike—effective practitioners tailor approaches to specific contexts.
  
• Assuming urban-rural or liberal-conservative binaries: Simplified color-coded charts or assumptions about identity linkages (e.g., urban = liberal, rural = conservative) often don't hold up in practice. PACE’s research shows more nuance, urging practitioners to avoid overgeneralizing by identity marker.
  
• Assuming shared definitions: Words like “democracy,” “justice,” and “equity” mean different things to different people. Failing to explore or name these differences at the outset can lead to misalignment and mistrust.
  
• Neglecting class and wealth in civic framing: There's a tendency to center race and politics while overlooking the impact of economic status on how people engage or feel invited into civic spaces.
  
• Leading with ideological language: Using politicized terms (like DEI language) can alienate people before they arrive. Instead, lead with shared values or neutral framing (e.g., “shared voice in shaping our communities”).
  
• Using political labels to invite participation: Terms like bipartisan may actually repel certain groups, particularly conservatives. Instead, lead with values-based framing like “love of country” or “working together for better solutions.”
  
• Overreliance on identity grouping in framing: As one example highlighted, well-meaning inclusive messaging can unintentionally exclude people (e.g., non-English speakers or immigrant women) if language access or terminology isn’t thoughtfully designed.
  
• Using institutional language with community partners: Terms like “stakeholders,” “capacity-building,” or “public engagement” may not resonate—and can create a barrier between facilitators and the communities they’re trying to reach.
  
• Creating ‘neutral’ spaces that ignore power: Neutrality isn’t always inclusive—especially when power dynamics are present. Avoid designing dialogue spaces that ask marginalized groups to “check” their lived experience at the door in the name of civility.
  
• Forcing agreement on identity norms: Trying to get all participants to align on contested identity concepts (e.g., pronouns) too quickly can derail dialogue. Instead, facilitators can set shared values as the foundation and emphasize mutual respect over ideological agreement.
  
• Tokenizing participants: Inviting someone to represent an entire identity group without real decision-making power or follow-up support can do more harm than good. True inclusion means meaningful involvement, not symbolic presence.
  
• Over-engineering the process: Sometimes facilitators focus so much on structure, tools, or outcomes that they forget the human element. Simplicity, flexibility, and authentic presence often build more trust than polished materials.
  
• Skipping relationship-building: Successful engagement requires trust built over time—not one-time invitations.
  
• Bypassing local leaders: National orgs that try to engage directly without local partnership risk undermining community trust.
  
• Undervaluing listening: Practitioners may feel pressure to produce or perform, but multiple panelists emphasized that slowing down and deeply listening—especially early in engagement efforts—is critical to building trust and understanding community needs.
  
• Forgetting to make participation accessible: Events held during work hours, requiring transportation, or lacking language access or childcare can unintentionally exclude many who are most impacted.

Stay Connected

If you're inspired to keep exploring what inclusive public engagement can look like across political, cultural, and geographic divides, we invite you to join NCDD and connect with a national network of dialogue and deliberation practitioners. Continue the conversation, share resources, and strengthen your practice by becoming a member at ncdd.org/join!

Let’s keep building more inclusive, courageous, and community-rooted engagement—together.

Want to Watch the Webinar or Explore More?

• Watch the recording linked here!
• Explore the PowerPoint slide deck: linked here
• Check out the curated resources from the webinar: linked here
• Find the chat transcript: linked here 
• Complete our feedback survey to help shape future events